intended to increase the knowledge, interest, and anticipation of the reader, thereby hastening the realization of our hopes and prayers for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Beit HaMikdash. Who Was Yosef HaKohein? Yosef HaKohein is one of the more colorful and indeed enigmatic figures that populate the voluminous literature of Chazal. A prominent personality and a well known Talmid Cha- cham, he is cited as performing actions that, while in themselves permissible, could easily be misunderstood and lead to inadvertent violations of Torah Law. “Yosef HaKohein brought wine and oil (as Bikurim) but they (the Mikdash authorities) did not accept them. (Challah 4:11)” But there is a Mishna which permits it! "No liquids may be brought as Bikurim except for the products of olives and grapes… (Terumot 11:3)”. Bartenura explains, “You shall take the first of every fruit of the ground… (Devarim 26:2)”, i.e. you shall bring fruit as Bikurim and not liquids. Nevertheless, an exception was made for wine and olive oil." Bartenura explains that this unusual "relaxation of the rules" permitting wine and oil to be brought as Bikurim was derived from the example of Teruma. The Torah says regarding Teruma, "All the best of your oil, all the best of your wine …to you (to the Kohanim) have I given them" (Bamidbar 18:12 - Note the Rashi). And in fact the Rambam rules, "Liquids are not permitted to be brought as Bikurim except for olives (oil) and grapes (wine) as it is said, 'The fruit of the land .." and not liquids, and if someone did bring liquids (as Bikurim with the exception of olive oil and wine) they were not accepted" (Hilchot Bikurim 2:4). However, the Mishnaic basis of this Halachic ruling is unclear. Radbaz, R. David b. Shlomo Ibn Zimra, a major classic commentator on the Rambam, explains this ruling. "In the end of Masechet Terumot, we learn, "No liquids may be brought as Bikurim except for the products of olives and grapes…", yet we find in the end of Masechet Chala, "Yosef HaKohein brought wine and oil (as Bikurim) but the (Mikdash authorities) did not accept them. Our master, (the Rambam) in his commentary on the Mishna wrote that the Mishna (from Terumot permitting olive oil and wine quoted above) is actually according to R. Yehuda and is not accepted as the Halacha. However here, in Hilchot Bikurim, he changed his mind and in fact did rule according to the Mishna in Terumot. The reason is because he saw a Yerushalmi where this very question was discussed." If this is so, where did Yosef HaKohein go wrong? Why didn't the Mikdash authorities accept his wine and oil as Bikurim? Radbaz continues, "The wine and oil of Yosef HaKohein were not accepted because he did not harvest the grapes and olives with that specific intention." That is, when he harvested his olives and grapes, he did not then have the intention of bringing olive oil and wine as Bikurim. "Therefore the Mishna from Terumot, permitting olive oil and wine, describes a situation where the farmer did indeed have the intention (of bringing oil and wine as Bikurim when he originally harvested his olives and grapes. Yosef Hakohein, when he harvested his olives and grapes, did not fulfill this precondition of proper intent and this was made known to the Mikdash authorities." (Though our sources do not specify, perhaps when they saw the olive oil and wine in his Bikurim basket, they asked him what his intentions were when he harvested his olives and grapes.) If he would have had the proper intent, then his oil and wine would have been accepted as Bikurim. Radbaz concludes by expressing astonishment that Rambam in Hilchot Bikurim "did not differentiate between olives and grapes which were harvested with the intention of making them into oil and wine, thereby being suitable for Bikurim, and olives and grapes which were harvested without this original intention and thereby, not suitable for Bikurim." The Gemara (Zevachim 100a) relates how Yosef HaKohein's wife died on Erev Pesach and "he did not wish to ritually defile himself" by attending to her funeral and coming in contact with her dead body. The Sages taught that the death of a wife is unquestionably a valid reason for a Kohein to become ritually impure and based their conclusion on the pasuk, "Say to the Kohanim, the sons of Aaron, 'Each of you shall not ritually contaminate himself to a (dead) person except to the relative who is closest to him, to his mother and his father… (Vayikra 21:2)” The Sages postulated that the closest relative a man can have is his wife. (Note the Sifra and Bereishit 2:24) But Yosef HaKohein knew that if he came into contact with his wife's dead body, he would enter a state of ritual impurity and he would be forbidden to offer and eat the Korban Pesach! The Gemara continues, "His brother Kohanim took council and they decided to ritually contaminate him by force", thus recalling him to his primary responsibility. If any Kohein, even the Kohein Gadol, stumbled upon an unburied corpse and there is no one else available to attend to its burial, then he must drop everything and immediately attend to it. This unattended corpse - the Meit Mitzva (which may be loosely translated as "a corpse which it is incumbent upon the finder to bury") must be buried by the first person who comes upon it, including Kohanim. No Kohein, even a Kohein Gadol, could avoid this obligation because of claims of the necessity of maintaining the standards of ritual purity. Chazal condemned Yosef HaKohein's exaggerated notion of ritual purity. A month later on Pesach Sheini, "...Yosef HaKohein also brought his sons and the men of his household to keep Pesach Sheini in Jerusalem, but they (the Sages) turned him back lest (his act of bringing his entire household) should be established and firmly fixed (in the eyes of the public) as an obligation." In contradistinction to the "real" Pesach, the observance of Pesach Sheini was not incumbent on all males. It was to be observed only by those who, for a valid reason, were unable to ascend to Jerusalem and offer the Korban Pesach on the 14th of Nissan. The Sages did not want cause confusion in the eyes of K'lal Yisrael. Despite his strict adherence to the laws of ritual purity,
Yosef HaKohein "followed his master to Tzidon" to learn Torah outside of
Eretz Yisrael. The Sages had decreed that all land outside of Eretz Yisrael
was impure by giving it the same Halachic status as a Beit HaP’ras. A Beit
HaP’ras is a field which had a grave in it and then was plowed over thereby
scattering the bones (Note Mo'ed Katan 5b). In the same way a Kohein becomes
ritually impure if he enters a cemetery, he becomes impure if he enters a
Beit HaP’ras and when he departs from Eretz Yisrael. This was one of the
decrees ordained by the Sages to discourage emigration. Chazal preferred
that Jews should live in Eretz Yisrael even in a city whose population was
primarily non- Jewish and not live in Chutz La'aretz in a city whose
population was primarily Jewish. [The
Parshat Pinchas Homepage]
|
