The Eri B. Sit edition and audio series of the Talmud Bavli, dedicated to the souls of Shemuel, Abraham, and Shaul, and to the parents who gave them life: May they find favor in the eyes of people and of God, and may the Holy Spirit fill all their hearts with good deeds. Amen and amen.
Folio 12 is being studied for the elevation of the soul of Avraham ben Esther and Moshe ben Luna. May their souls rest in the Garden of Eden. Amen.
Today’s folio is being studied for the complete recovery of Yosef ben Sabut Enna. May God send him a complete recovery, together with all those who need healing. Amen.
We begin today’s discussion on page 12, side 1, at the top line: “It was asked of them: If the libations come by themselves, what is the ruling?”
Of course, this passage of the Gemara is discussing the mitzvah of the Levites to sing a song at the time of a sacrifice. Yesterday we learned that they would sing the song at the time the wine was poured on the altar.
Now, let us say that they brought the communal sacrifice on one day and brought its libations afterward. We learned in Menachot that the libations could be brought on the following day. The Gemara derives this from a verse: Even if the libations are brought on the following day, they are valid.
The Gemara therefore asks: When the libations are brought separately, do the Levites still sing the song?
The Gemara presents the uncertainty. On the one hand, since we learned yesterday that one sings only over wine, this is wine. What difference does it make whether it was brought separately from the sacrifice? Ultimately, it is wine, and the Levites should sing.
Or perhaps the principle is that the altar must be eating and drinking together. That is, on the day the sacrifice is brought, the wine is brought as well. Perhaps we require both the eating and the drinking, and when there is drinking alone—wine without the sacrifice—there is no song.
Rav Arash says that we learned that good things occur on auspicious days, while unfortunate things occur on days destined for misfortune. We learned that Tisha B’Av was one of those unfortunate days: the enemies entered the Sanctuary and burned the Temple, yet the Levites were singing songs on that day.
What song were they singing? They were singing the psalm, “He returned their iniquity upon them.”
The Gemara asks: What were the Levites singing for? If you say that they were singing for the obligatory burnt-offering, that cannot be. By that point, there was no longer an obligatory burnt-offering on that day. We learned that on the seventeenth of Tammuz, the daily offering was discontinued. Therefore, they could not have been singing the song for the daily burnt-offering.
Perhaps they were singing for a voluntary burnt-offering. But Rav Mori, son of Rav Kahana, taught us yesterday that one does not sing over a voluntary burnt-offering. One sings only over a burnt-offering that is fixed for a particular time. Therefore, that cannot have been the reason either.
It must have been that they were singing over wine that came without a sacrifice. For example, perhaps a person had brought a sacrifice several weeks earlier, while it was still possible to do so, but had not yet brought the wine. He then brought the wine at a later time, by itself. This would demonstrate that one sings even over wine alone, when the sacrifice was not brought on that day.
The Gemara rejects this proof. It does not make sense to say that this was an obligatory song. The song they were singing was the song of the day. We know that the Temple was destroyed on the night after Shabbat, on Sunday, which is the first day of the week. What is the song of the first day of the week? It is the song associated with Wednesday.
God placed those words in their mouths as a forewarning of the destruction. The song had nothing to do with the regular song of a sacrifice. They were not singing an official song; they were reciting a psalm that expressed and eulogized the situation in which they found themselves.
But how can you say that this was not an official song? The verse says that they were standing on the platform. The Gemara answers that there is no difficulty. It is possible to sing a song even without a sacrifice.
If so, the Gemara asks, why would they not sing over the libations alone as well? If it is permissible to sing even when there is no sacrifice, then they should also sing when the libations are brought by themselves.
The Gemara answers that this would create a problem. If we allow them to sing when the song is not mandatory, people may come to treat the mandatory song lightly. They may conclude that all singing is voluntary and eventually neglect even those times when the song is required.
Accordingly, even according to the view that a song is not required over libations brought alone, we do not establish it as a voluntary song. If we make it voluntary, people may come to treat the obligatory song lightly. The Gemara therefore does not reach a conclusion regarding the question of whether one sings when the libations are brought alone. It cannot bring a proof from this baraita, because there is no clear proof, and the question remains unresolved.
We now turn to the next passage of the Gemara, which discusses Jewish history. Rav Yosef taught in the name of Rav that the first Temple was destroyed on the night after the sabbatical year. We said that it was destroyed in the year following the sabbatical year, which sounds like the first year of the next sabbatical cycle.
The Gemara asks whether that is possible. In the Book of Ezekiel, Ezekiel says that he received a prophecy twenty-five years after the exile, on Rosh Hashanah, in the tenth month. That itself appears contradictory: how can it be Rosh Hashanah if it is the tenth day of the month?
The verse also says that it was fourteen years after Jerusalem had been destroyed. The Gemara explains that this must have been a Jubilee year. The Jubilee is marked on Yom Kippur, the tenth day of the month, and yet it is called Rosh Hashanah with regard to the Jubilee. That was when certain matters were renewed.
Thus, Ezekiel’s prophecy was given fourteen years after the destruction, in a Jubilee year. The Gemara now asks: If the Temple was destroyed in the first year of the sabbatical cycle, how could fourteen years after the destruction be a Jubilee year?
The Gemara explains that this does not depend on when the Jubilee cycle begins. The verse says that the prophecy was given fourteen years after the destruction, on Yom Kippur, and that it must have been a Jubilee year because otherwise the tenth day could not be called Rosh Hashanah in this context.
But if one calculates the years, the problem remains. If the Temple was destroyed in the first year of the sabbatical cycle, then fourteen years later would not be a Jubilee year. A Jubilee year is always the year after the sabbatical year. From the first year of a sabbatical cycle to the next point that could be a Jubilee, the calculation does not produce fourteen years.
The Gemara says that from one Jubilee to the next there are fifty years, and that the sabbatical year is followed by the Jubilee year. If the destruction took place in the first year of the sabbatical cycle, then going forward fourteen years would not bring us to a Jubilee. One would need either eight years or fifteen years, depending on how the year of the destruction is counted.
This is the Gemara’s question. We know that Ezekiel gave his prophecy fourteen years after the destruction, and that the prophecy was delivered in a Jubilee year. We also know that the destruction took place on the night after the sabbatical year. How can the numbers work out?
Rashi explains that in the Jubilee year the fields return to their original owners. The passage sounds as though the Jubilee year was the fourteenth year after the destruction, and that the year of the destruction itself is included in the count. Since the Jubilee is always the year after the sabbatical year, the calculation still needs to be explained.
If one counts backward fifteen years from the Jubilee year, one arrives at the year of the destruction. If, for example, the destruction occurred in year thirty-six of the Jubilee cycle and the prophecy was given in year fifty, then counting from thirty-six through fifty produces fifteen years. That is the Gemara’s difficulty: the verse says fourteen years, while the calculation appears to require fifteen.
The Gemara answers through Ravina. Ravina says that the fourteen years mentioned by Ezekiel begin after the year of the destruction. We are counting fourteen years after the destruction, not counting the year in which the destruction occurred. Thus, if the destruction occurred in year thirty-six, the count begins with year thirty-seven. Counting fourteen years from the following year brings us to the Jubilee year.
According to Ravina, there are fifteen years from the year of the destruction itself until the Jubilee, but fourteen years after the year of the destruction. That resolves the first difficulty.
However, another difficulty arises. The verse says that Ezekiel received the prophecy twenty-five years after the exile. There were two exiles during this period. The first was the exile associated with Jehoiakim, and the second was the exile associated with Ezekiel.
Nebuchadnezzar was the king. In the second year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, he captured Jehoiakim. That occurred seventeen years before the destruction. The second exile took place several years later, in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, and Ezekiel was among those exiled at that time. The Temple was destroyed in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign.
Thus, there was an initial exile in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, another exile in the eighth year, and the destruction of the Temple in the nineteenth year. Ezekiel went into exile in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, which was seven years after Jehoiakim had been captured.
The Gemara therefore asks: How can the verse say that the prophecy was given twenty-five years after the exile? The calculation seems to produce twenty-six years.
The Gemara explains that the initial exile was seven years after Jehoiakim was captured. Jehoiakim was captured in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, and the exile took place in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, which is seven years after Jehoiakim’s capture.
The verse says that they went into exile in the seventh year and again in the eighteenth year. It does not mean that there were separate exiles in the seventh and eighth years. Rather, the first exile was seven years after Jehoiakim was captured, which was the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. The second event took place in the eighteenth year after Jehoiakim’s capture, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign.
Ezekiel went into the original exile, in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, or the seventh year from Jehoiakim’s capture. The Temple was destroyed in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. From the seventh year to the eighteenth year, not including the eighteenth year, there are eleven years. Thus, Ezekiel’s exile was eleven years before the destruction.
From the destruction to the prophecy there were, according to Ravina’s calculation, fifteen years when the year of the destruction itself is included. Eleven plus fifteen equals twenty-six, whereas the verse says twenty-five.
The Gemara challenges Ravina: You resolved the calculation of the fourteen years by saying that the year of the destruction is not counted, but you have created another problem. The passage now appears to contain twenty-six years from Ezekiel’s exile until the prophecy, not twenty-five.
The Gemara examines another possibility. Perhaps there was an exile in the eighteenth year and then another event—the destruction—in the nineteenth year. If so, from the seventh year through the eighteenth year there would be twelve years, and from the destruction to the prophecy there would be another fourteen years. Once again, the total would be twenty-six years.
Even if one does not count the first year of Ezekiel’s exile, there would still be eleven years until the eighteenth year, followed by the fourteen years after the destruction. That would again total twenty-five only if the destruction and the second exile are understood in a particular way.
The Gemara answers that there were not three separate exiles. There were only two. The first exile occurred seven years after Jehoiakim was captured, which was the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. The second exile occurred in the eighteenth year after Jehoiakim was captured, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. The exile and the destruction occurred in the same year.
Therefore, one should not count an additional year of exile before the destruction. Beginning with the second year of Ezekiel’s exile, there are eleven years until the year of the destruction. From the year after the destruction until the Jubilee there are fourteen years. Eleven plus fourteen equals twenty-five.
The Gemara is therefore saying that one mistakenly assumed there was a separate year of exile followed by a separate year of destruction. In fact, the exile and the destruction occurred in the same year. This is how the calculation of twenty-five years works.
The Gemara further explains the chronology. In the first year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, he conquered Nineveh. In the second year, he conquered Jehoiakim. In the eighth year of his reign, Ezekiel was exiled, and in the nineteenth year of his reign, the exile and destruction occurred together.
We now come to the second Temple. The same principle is stated: the second Temple was also destroyed on the night after the sabbatical year, just as the first Temple had been destroyed in the year following the sabbatical year.
The Gemara asks whether this is possible. The second Temple stood for 420 years. Let us calculate. In 400 years, there are eight Jubilee cycles, because each Jubilee cycle contains fifty years. That accounts for 400 years, leaving twenty years. In twenty years, there are two sabbatical years, accounting for fourteen years, leaving six years.
According to this calculation, the destruction would have occurred in the sixth year of the sabbatical cycle. If the Temple stood for 420 years, it would have been destroyed in the sixth year, and the following year would have been the seventh year—the sabbatical year itself. That appears to contradict the statement that it was destroyed on the night after the sabbatical year.
The calculation therefore seems to indicate that the Temple was destroyed during the sabbatical year itself. If the 420th year was the sixth year of the cycle, the destruction in the following year would be in the seventh year, the sabbatical year.
The Gemara answers in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda, who says that the fiftieth year is also counted as the first year of the next sabbatical cycle. The fiftieth year is used in both ways. Therefore, in the 400 years, one does not simply count eight periods of fifty. One must also account for the eight years that serve as both Jubilee years and the first years of the following sabbatical cycles.
According to Rabbi Yehuda, the calculation changes. Although there are eight Jubilee years in 400 years, those eight years are also the first years of new sabbatical cycles. When the remaining years are calculated with this overlap in mind, the 420th year falls within the sabbatical cycle in such a way that the 421st year is the year following the sabbatical year.
Thus, according to Rabbi Yehuda, the second Temple was indeed destroyed in the year following the sabbatical year. The Jubilee year is counted both as the fiftieth year of one cycle and as the first year of the next cycle, and this resolves the calculation.
The Gemara then asks: If you use Rabbi Yehuda’s method to show that the second Temple was destroyed on the night after the sabbatical year, how can you use the same method for the first Temple? The first Temple was also said to have been destroyed on the night after the sabbatical year, but the calculation does not seem to work in the same way.
The Gemara explains that from the time the Jewish people entered the Land of Israel under Joshua until they were exiled, they counted seventeen Jubilee cycles. One cannot say that they began counting Jubilee years immediately upon entering the Land of Israel. If they had begun counting immediately, the first Temple would have been destroyed in a Jubilee year, which would not fit with the earlier calculation.
The Jewish people entered the Land of Israel under Joshua, and the first Temple was destroyed approximately 850 years later. If the Jubilee count had begun immediately, the calculation would place the destruction in a Jubilee year. But we already learned from Ezekiel that fourteen years after the destruction was a Jubilee year. That would not work if the destruction itself had occurred in a Jubilee year.
When, then, did they begin counting the Jubilee years? The Gemara answers that the seven years during which they conquered the Land of Israel were not counted. After the seven years of conquest came seven years during which the land was divided among the tribes. Only afterward did they begin counting the Jubilee cycles.
That accounts for the fourteen-year difference: seven years of conquest and seven years of dividing the land. The Jubilee count began only fourteen years after the Jewish people entered the Land of Israel. This calculation works according to the Rabbis’ method, in which the fiftieth year is separate from the first year of the next sabbatical cycle.
According to Rabbi Yehuda, however, each Jubilee year is also the first year of the next sabbatical cycle. Since there were seventeen Jubilee cycles, this creates an additional seventeen years. Subtract the fourteen years during which the Jubilee count had not yet begun, and there is a remainder of three years.
According to that calculation, the first Temple would have been destroyed in the third year of the sabbatical cycle, rather than on the night after the sabbatical year. How, then, can the Gemara say that the first Temple was destroyed on the night after the sabbatical year according to Rabbi Yehuda?
The Gemara answers that there were additional years during which the Jubilee count was suspended. Sanhedrin exiled the ten tribes, and they remained in exile until Jeremiah returned and brought them back. The Jubilee years were not counted during those years either. Once the ten tribes returned, the counting of the Jubilee cycles began again.
When this additional period is included in the calculation, the numbers work out. The first Temple was destroyed in year thirty-six of a Jubilee cycle, and fourteen years later came year fifty, the Jubilee year. The first year of the next cycle is the year following the sabbatical year, so the destruction can indeed be understood as having occurred on the night after the sabbatical year.
This means that there was a period when the counting of Jubilee years was stopped because the ten tribes had been exiled. When they returned, the counting resumed, and that accounts for the remaining discrepancy. The Gemara makes the calculation accordingly, as explained in the passage.
In conclusion, according to Rabbi Yehuda, both the first and second Temples can be understood as having been destroyed on the night after the sabbatical year. The calculation for the second Temple works through the principle that the Jubilee year is also counted as the first year of the following sabbatical cycle. The calculation for the first Temple requires the additional facts that the Jubilee count did not begin during the fourteen years of conquest and land division, and that it was later suspended while the ten tribes were in exile.
After all these adjustments, the Jubilee year occurred fourteen years after the destruction, and the destruction itself was on the night after the sabbatical year. That is how the Gemara resolves the calculation according to Rabbi Yehuda.
May God be blessed forever and ever. Amen and amen.