In the last years of the Second Temple, the Jewish people was divided up into several factions, with different ideologies and practices. The largest ones were the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The Pharisees were the sages, the bearers of the Oral Torah, followed by the vast majority of the common people. The Sadducees denied the Oral Torah. Their bastion of strength was a large part of the Priesthood, as well as the upper class. They didn't believe in a Hereafter, and saw the Temple service as essentially the be-all and end-all of Judaism. By all accounts, they were lax in most areas, relying on the cleansing of the sacrifices. But the biggest distinction between Pharisees and Sadducees that we can see, is that after the destruction of the Temple, the Pharisess thrived, and the Sadducees disappeared.
People often overlook the fact that two-thirds of the commandments in the Torah relate to the Temple and to Sacrifice. Those contemporary groups that have written the sacrifices out of Judaism need to be aware that they are denying two-thirds of the Torah before they even get started! (Yes, I am aware of the view that the sacrifices were a concession rather than a commandment. I can find little basis for that view r in classical sources, and that view is contradicted by that same author's other writings). For the Sadducees, the Temple WAS Judaism. No Temple equals no Judaism. It was over. They simply gave up.
At the fall of Jerusalem, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai persuaded the Romans to grant the sleepy coastal town of Yavneh as a refuge for the sages. He reestablished the Sanhedrin there. The Talmud reports that most of the Sages were actually quite pessimistic about the survival Of Judaism. Had Rabbi Yochanan been a modern Jewish leader, he probably would have had memorials for the Temple put up everywhere, as well as special remembrance days observed. That is not what he did. Yes, two older fast days, originally commemorating the destruction of the First Temple, were revitalized and reemphasized. But he did much more than that. He instituted many practices that had only been done in the Temple into everyday life and observance. These were "zacher laMikdash", a "Memorial of the Temple". For example, the Etrog and Lulav (the four species) are commanded in the Torah to be taken everywhere on the first day of Sukkot, but, in the Temple, they were to be taken all seven days of the feast, with a joyous procession around the altar. Rabbi Yochanan instituted that now it should be taken everywhere throughout the feast, with a procession around the "bimah" (the place from where the Torah is read) . But these practices said several different things. Yes, it was to remember that which WAS, but is now missing. But it was also to instill faith that the Temple was coming back; at the time when HaShem will choose. It was also to do SOMETHING rather than nothing. That "something" was not just an action, but an implanting of a consciousness of a nearly forgotten message.The powerful messages of the Temple Service could still be gotten, albeit in a lesser form, even now. Marching around the Bimah is NOT a substitute for the Temple. It is a memorial, a hope for restoration, and at least it gives us a sense of what should, and will be.
In our own lives, we often lose someone or something that is incredibly precious. Some people stop living at that point. Others remember the loss, but are determined to go on living, enriched by the memories of who and what was, and realizing that they will one day be reunited. As long as that thought is put into practice, the lost person still lives through them. The void is filled, and it is no longer a void.
May G-d restore all of our losses!
People often overlook the fact that two-thirds of the commandments in the Torah relate to the Temple and to Sacrifice. Those contemporary groups that have written the sacrifices out of Judaism need to be aware that they are denying two-thirds of the Torah before they even get started! (Yes, I am aware of the view that the sacrifices were a concession rather than a commandment. I can find little basis for that view r in classical sources, and that view is contradicted by that same author's other writings). For the Sadducees, the Temple WAS Judaism. No Temple equals no Judaism. It was over. They simply gave up.
At the fall of Jerusalem, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai persuaded the Romans to grant the sleepy coastal town of Yavneh as a refuge for the sages. He reestablished the Sanhedrin there. The Talmud reports that most of the Sages were actually quite pessimistic about the survival Of Judaism. Had Rabbi Yochanan been a modern Jewish leader, he probably would have had memorials for the Temple put up everywhere, as well as special remembrance days observed. That is not what he did. Yes, two older fast days, originally commemorating the destruction of the First Temple, were revitalized and reemphasized. But he did much more than that. He instituted many practices that had only been done in the Temple into everyday life and observance. These were "zacher laMikdash", a "Memorial of the Temple". For example, the Etrog and Lulav (the four species) are commanded in the Torah to be taken everywhere on the first day of Sukkot, but, in the Temple, they were to be taken all seven days of the feast, with a joyous procession around the altar. Rabbi Yochanan instituted that now it should be taken everywhere throughout the feast, with a procession around the "bimah" (the place from where the Torah is read) . But these practices said several different things. Yes, it was to remember that which WAS, but is now missing. But it was also to instill faith that the Temple was coming back; at the time when HaShem will choose. It was also to do SOMETHING rather than nothing. That "something" was not just an action, but an implanting of a consciousness of a nearly forgotten message.The powerful messages of the Temple Service could still be gotten, albeit in a lesser form, even now. Marching around the Bimah is NOT a substitute for the Temple. It is a memorial, a hope for restoration, and at least it gives us a sense of what should, and will be.
In our own lives, we often lose someone or something that is incredibly precious. Some people stop living at that point. Others remember the loss, but are determined to go on living, enriched by the memories of who and what was, and realizing that they will one day be reunited. As long as that thought is put into practice, the lost person still lives through them. The void is filled, and it is no longer a void.
May G-d restore all of our losses!
No comments:
Post a Comment