SHEYIBANEH BEIT HAMIKDASH...
A series of articles on Beit HaMikdash-related topics by Catriel Sugarman 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.

RED ALERT: - Shavu'ot was NOT Chag Habikurim
Now that I have your attention (I hope), I want to clarify a point about which there seems to be a lot of confusion. (I found that out during the past week.) When the Torah says, "Uvyom HaBikurim… And on the day of the first fruits…" (Bamidbar 28:26-27), it does NOT mean that all the land-owning agriculturists among Am Yisrael in Eretz Yisrael brought their Bikurim to the Beit HaMikdash on Shavu'ot. What it DOES mean is that Shavu'ot was the "kick-off" for the "Bikurim season". Farmers throughout the country started bringing Bikurim on Shavu'ot and - depending on where in Eretz Yisrael they lived - continued bringing them to the Mikdash until Sukkot and sometimes even as late as Chanuka. A farmer from sub-tropical Emek Beit She'an, whose dates ripened early, brought his Bikurim on Shavu'ot, or more likely, not too long after the Chag ended. However, the terraced olives grown in the mountainous northern Galil matured in the late summer. For this reason, farmers living near Tzefat brought their Bikurim much later. The Mikdash authorities did not accept unripe fruit.

"How were the Bikurim taken up (to Jerusalem)? All the people, inhabitants of the villages which constituted the Ma'amad, assembled in the city of the Ma'amad" (Bikurim 3:2). The Tosefta notes; "People did not go up on an individual basis, they went up by district", the farmer brought his Bikurim together with thousands of his friends and neighbors, members of the local Ma'amad and it was highly organized. A Ma'amad was the name given to the "collective" of Israelite farmers hailing from a particular geographic area of Eretz Yisrael. The country was divided into 24 Ma'amad districts and each one of the 24 Ma'amad groups was associated with one of the 24 Mishmarot (divisions) of the Kehuna, the priesthood. Both the Ma'amad group and the associated priestly Mishmar represented the same district. And since the farmers of each particular Ma'amad were all from one small geographic area of Eretz Yisrael and their harvest ripened more or less at the same time, they could bring their Bikurim up to Jerusalem together. There- fore, every couple of weeks, another Ma'amad, consisting of thousands of farmers from a different part of Eretz Yisrael (accompanied by the local Kohanim of the Mishmeret whose turn it was it serve in the Mikdash), ascended to Jerusalem to bring their Bikurim. (When a Mishmar of Kohanim was called to officiate in the Beit Hamikdash when its associated Ma'amad did not bring Bikurim, some of the members of its affiliated Ma'amad group nevertheless, still went up to Jerusalem. They entered the Azara to witness the daily sacrificial rite and served as representatives of K'lal Yisrael.) In the spirit of "in the multitude of the people is the Glory of the King", the Mikdash authorities coordinated the exact arrival time of the Ma'amadot and organized for them an impressive entrance into Yerushalayim. As they marched into the city carrying their Bikurim, they were warmly welcomed by the local population of Yerushalmim.

Another widespread area of confusion seems to concern the nature of Bikurim. I have before me a beautiful coloring book published by an Orthodox organization which shows a happy family (Even the donkeys are smiling!), wending their way up Yerushalayim (visible on the horizon). The family members are holding straw baskets filled with Bikurim including oranges, apples, and bananas. Leaving aside the historical inaccuracy, the Mishna (Bikurim 1:3) specifically says that "Bikurim may be brought only from the Shivat HaMinim", the seven species for which Eretz Yisrael is praised in the Torah. "A land of wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, oil-olives and dates (from which honey is made)." (Devarim 8:8) The Sifri notes that "honey" quoted in the Pasuk cited above, is not bee's honey, but rather it is the sweet juicy extract of the date. By paraphrasing Rashi, we can easily under- stand the underlying principle of this ancient tradition. The Torah says Mei'rieshit, "from the first ripened fruits", implying not all-first ripened fruit were subject to the obligation of Bikurim. When the Torah discusses Bikurim, it employs the term 'Eretz' (land). The Torah uses the same word, Eretz, when it lists the Sheva Minim; 'Eretz' - a land of wheat, barley, etc. Since both quoted verses contain the word Eretz, by a Gezeira Shava (parallel terminology), we may conclude that only the Sheva Minim were subject to the law of Bikurim.

"When they came to Shilo, Bamot were forbidden" (Zevachim 14:6).

When Am Yisrael crossed the Jordan into Eretz Yisrael, they erected the Mishkan in Gilgal, to the east of Yericho. During the wars of conquest and while they were apportioning the land, the Mishkan remained in Gilgal. Unlike the wilderness days, during this interim period, private people were permitted to build Bamot ("private altars") for sacrifice. The Sages derived the source for this seeming leniency from Moses' statement, "…for you have not yet come to the resting place or to the inheritance that the Lord your G-d gives you" (Devarim 12:9). This was in sharp contrast to the years of desert wonderings when Am Yisrael could offer Korbanot only on the Mizbei'ach of the central sanctuary.

However, after they finished conquering and apportioning the land, they removed the Mishkan from Gilgal "and the whole congregation of the Children of Israel assembled themselves at Shilo, and set up the 'Tent of Meeting' there; and the land was subdued before them" (Yehoshua 18:1). Once they erected the Mishkan in Shilo, Bamot were once again forbidden just as they had been during Am Yisrael's trek through the desert. (Interestingly, during the period of Heter Bamot when the "high places" were permitted, women were permitted to receive and sprinkle the blood of the Korbanot offered on the Bama. Unlike the offerings on the Mizbei'ach of the Beit HaMikdash or in Shilo, the Korbanot offered on a private Bama did not require a Kohein (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Ch. 9:99(7).) Shilo was considered the "resting place" referred to in Moshe's statement because in Shilo, they "rested" from war and the Aron was placed within. The Mishkan "rested" in Shilo for 369 very stormy years.

After Shilo was destroyed, the Mishkan was removed to Nov and then to Giv'on and during that interim period, Bamot were once again permitted. Neither Nov nor Giv'on, bereft as these shrines were of the Aron, were considered true "resting places". "After they came to Jerusalem, the Bamot were forbidden and never permitted again: [because] this [the Beit HaMikdash] was the inheritance…" (Zevachim 12:8). "The sanctity of the Beit HaMikdash was sanctified for its own time and forever after" as it is written. "For the Lord will not cast off His people, neither will He forsake His inheritance" (T'hilim 94:14). It is also written, "For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for his habitation. This is My resting place forever. Here I will dwell; for I have desired it" (ibid 132:13,14). Not surprisingly, when Am Yisrael went into exile, they did not build a temple by the rivers of Babylon, nor did they build Bamot when they returned to Eretz Yisrael. By then, Bamot were not even an issue.

Catriel's book in progress: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrim’s Perspective; A Guided Tour through the Temple and the Divine Service