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.

The Sages, "Democracy", and the Beit Hamikdash
Normative Judaism - "Pharisaic Judaism" - based on the Oral Tradition, had one very important advantage over other local cultures in its struggle for survival against the all-encompassing worldwide Greek civilization that came to dominate the "known world". In contradistinction to the hide-bound sacerdotal cultures of Egypt, Babylonia, and our own Sadducees who restricted religious learning only to members of the priest- hood, the Sages (a.k.a. Pharisaic or in the "vernacular" Chazal) from the days of Ezra, cajoled, encouraged and taught all Am Yisrael "to occupy themselves with words of Torah". This difference in outlook between the Sages and the Sadducees is dramatically illustrated in an instructive Gemara. Yannai Hamelech, one of the later Chashmona'im, asked a Sadducee leader, Eleazar ben Poira, how he should punish the Sages whom he believed affronted him. The Sadducee replied, "Trample them under foot". Taken aback, the king then asked, "And what will happen to the Torah?" The Sadducee blithely answered, "It will be wrapped up and laid in a corner, and all who wish to study it, let them come and study" (Kiddushin 66a).

Contrast this Sadducee passivity with the virile "affirmative action" of Chazal who taught, "Raise up many students!" The Sages had a very different attitude to the "masses" than did Babylonian priests, Egyptian hierophants, Hellenist votaries, or the mystae of the later mystery religions. In contrast to the religious leaders of other nations who viewed their people with disdain, our sages who identified with the "broad masses", never ceased exhorting them to devote themselves to Torah and its study. (A fascinating Gemara in Sanhedrin 94b notes that in the days of Chizkiyahu HaMelech, "Search was made from Dan to Be'er Sheva, and no Am Ha'aretz - ignoramus - was found… and no boy or girl, man or woman was found who was not thoroughly versed in the laws of purity and impurity." In the ideal Jewish state, every Jew - male and female - will be educated in every aspect of Torah study, even the most "esoteric".) The Sages considered the study of the Torah to be Avodat Hashem, Divine service. The Sages defined "La'avod" in the Pasuk (Devarim 11:12) "…to love the Lord your G-d and to serve Him" as Torah study (Sifre). The superiority of Limud HaTorah over all else - even over practice - is engendered by the obvious fact that the knowledge of the Torah must precede their observance. After Bar Kochba's horrific defeat (135 CE), the vengeful Roman government decided to finalize their victory by eradicating Judaism. After slaughtering untold thousands, the Romans promulgated decrees banning Limud HaTorah and the observance of Mitzvot. In an era of possible national demoralization and in the face of savage persecution, the surviving Sages met to discuss the relative importance of study and observance. "R. Tarfon and the elders were once reclining in the upper story of Nitza's house in Lod when this question was asked: Is study greater or practice? R. Tarfon answered, saying that practice is greater. R. Akiva answered, that study is greater for it leads to practice. Then they all answered and said, 'Study is greater for it leads to practice'" (Kiddushin 40b). The Pharisees, their illustrious predecessors, did what they could to make the entire people feel that they too had a stake in the Beit Hamikdash and that it was not simply the "club house" of a coterie of kohanim somewhere in Jerusalem. Despite the form of government foisted on the people, the Pharisaic Sages were the natural leaders of the people. Josephus wrote, "These have so great a power over the multitude, that when they say anything against the king, or against the High Priest, they are presently believed" (Antiquities bk. 13: 10).

The Pharisaic Sages and their Sadducees opponents held differing opinions in many areas of Halacha and the Avoda. Their differences stemmed from a basic divergence in their views as to the role of the Beit Hamikdash and its place in the life of Am Yisrael. The Sages conceived of a Sanctuary that would serve as the spiritual center of all Israel. The Mikdash, as envisioned by the Sages, was to be a place where all Am Yisrael, not just a well-connected sacerdotal class, could feel a sense of participation in the Avoda. The broad masses of the people would thereby deepen their cognitive bonds with the Mikdash and develop pride in being part of "a holy nation and kingdom of priests". This basic difference in outlook between the Sages and the Sadducees is perhaps most clearly encapsulated in how they related to the financing of public sacrifices and the institution of the Ma'amadot.

In the Mikdash of the Sages, ongoing expenses were met not by government grant or by the wealthy classes alone, but rather by the half-shekel Temple tax that was paid yearly by all adult male Israelites (Sh'mot 30:11-15). "The Sadducees used to say that a private individual may offer and bring (i.e. pay for) the Tamid - the daily sacrifice. What was their proof? They said, 'It is written, 'The one lamb shalt thou (singular) offer in the morning and the other lamb shalt thou (again singular) at dusk' (Bamidbar 28:4). And what did the Sages reply? 'It is written, 'My food which is presented before Me for offerings made by fire, for a sweet savor unto Me, shall ye (in the plural) observe' (Bamidbar 28:2). Therefore all Korbanot were to be taken out of the chamber, i.e. the (public) Temple fund." (Menachot 65a). The philosophical differences between the two points of view cannot be overestimated! By paying their yearly half-shekel, everyone in Israel, rich and poor had an equal share in the Avoda. The institution of the Ma'amadot was a logical extension of the idea that all the public sacrifices (including the daily sacrifices and the public sacrifices brought on Shabbat and on the Chagim) offered in the Mikdash were to be financed by all of Israel by means of the half-shekel annual Temple tax. A Ma'amad was the name given to a group of Israelites representing a particular geographic area. Each of the 24 Ma'amad groups was associated with one of the 24 Mishmarot (divisions) of the priesthood.

Both the Ma'amad group and the associated Mishmar represented the same district. When a Mishmar was called to service in the Mikdash, some of the members of its Ma'amad group would go up to Jerusalem, enter the Azara and serve as witnesses to the daily sacrificial rite as representatives of all Israel. The institution of the Ma'amadot, while traditionally attributed to the "first prophets", was "revitalized" under the influence of the Pharisaic Sages in the latter days of Bayit Sheini. The institution of the Ma'amadot dramatized the idea that the Avoda, while conducted by the Kohanim, belonged to all the people of Israel.

Kohanim were seen as "messengers" of the entire Jewish people. This "democratization" of the Mikdash, the Sanctuary of the Torah, gave every member of Am Yisrael a "portion" in the Mikdash and the Torah. Taught by the early Sages that everybody had a stake in the Torah and in the Mikdash, when inspired leadership appeared, Am Yisrael collectively decided that Torah values and the Mikdash were worth defending against all comers!

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