Temidin uMusafim - Chapter 2

The Radbaz explains that this mitzvah has four components: a) to have a fire continuously burning on the altar;
b) to bring ordinary fire with each sacrifice; c) to arrange the array of wood on the altar; and d) to offer two logs with the continuous offering. Although these different actions are each associated with a separate verse, since they all share one objective: to have fire burn on the altar, they are considered as one mitzvah.

There was a special pyre kept burning on the altar for this purpose, as stated in Halachah 4.

As Leviticus 9:24 states: “And fire emerged from before God and it... consumed the burnt-offering.” This fire remained on the altar throughout the entire existence of the Sanctuary. Yoma 21b relates that in the First and Second Temples, fire also descended from heaven and burned on the altar.

See Chapter 4, Halachah 5, which states that the priest who would remove the ashes from the altar would prepare the arrangement of wood and he would bring the logs together with the daily offering.

Yoma 26b derives this concept from a different prooftext. It is questionable why the Rambam deviates from that source, since by doing so, he is forced to derive two different concepts from the same verse.

Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 7:3 states that the logs used for the offering were “a cubit long and a cubit wide. Their thickness was like that of the leveling rod for an overflowing se’ah.”

See Sifra to the above verse; Yoma 26b.

The Radbaz maintains that the priest who would bring the logs in the morning (see note 4) would also bring a log in the afternoon and he would invite a friend to join him and bring the other log.

For the term used in that prooftext is singular.

See Hilchot Avodat Yom Kippurim 4:5.

See Chapter 3, Halachah 5.

As stated in Halachah 1.

Yoma 45a.

I.e., when the altar was arranged in the morning, these limbs and fats were placed there until the large arrangement could be prepared and kindled.

Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 81) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 133) count this prohibition as one of the Torah’s 613 mitzvot.

We have cited this reference because it is the one the Rambam refers to in Sefer HaMitzvot, loc. cit. Others cite Leviticus 6:5. And in his commentary on the Torah, Rashi states that there are two negative commandments involved.

Despite the fact that the fire of the altar as a whole continues to burn.

See Halachah 4.

See Chapter 3, Halachah 13.

Our translation is based on the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Tamid 2:4).

So that there would be enough air for the fire to burn effectively (Radbaz).

See Halachah 13. From the Rambam’s statements here and in his Commentary to the Mishnah (op. cit.:2), it would appear that the top surface of the altar was flat and the name tapuach (literally, “bulging”) was given because of the ash-pile made there. The Ra’avad differs and maintains that there was a bulge in the center of the surface of the altar itself. See also the Meiri in his commentary to Tamid who maintains that the term refers to a concave curve on the altar’s surface. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh support the Rambam’s interpretation.

See Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 7:3.

I.e., the corner closest to both the Temple Building and the ramp.

For, in this way, he will be fulfilling the directive of Leviticus 16:12: “And he shall take … flaming coals from the altar, before God.” Yoma 45b explains that this refers to the outer altar which has a portion that is “before God,” opposite the Holy of Holies. The second arrangement of fire was arrayed exactly in this position. Although the above verse speaks about the incense offering of Yom Kippur, our Sages also applied the concept to the incense offering brought each day.

A se’ah is slightly more than 8 liter in contemporary measure according to Shiurei Torah. Other commentaries consider it larger.

See Chapter 4, Halachah 11; Chapter 6, Halachah 11.

Har HaMoriah states that this can be inferred from the fact that our Sages did not mention any specific place for this arrangement.

I.e., its description as “the fire of the altar.’’ The Radbaz notes that Yoma 45b derives this concept from a different verse and explains that this is a characteristic practice of the Rambam in the Mishneh Torah: to interpret the Torah’s verses according to their simple meaning even though different interpretations are offered in prior Rabbinic sources.

Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 30) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 131) count this as one of the Torah’s 613 mitzvot.

It may not be performed by an Israelite (see Hilchot Bi‘at HaMikdash 9:8).

All four priestly garments, even though only two are mentioned explicitly in the Torah in this context [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Tamid 5:3)].

In contrast to other commentaries, according to the Rambam, these clothes are worn when removing the ashes from the altar and not when taking them out of the Temple Courtyard, for, as he states in Halachah 15, taking them out of the Temple Courtyard is not considered as priestly service.

I.e., garments that have not been consecrated.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.), the Rambam explains that the reason they prepared clothes of lesser value is not because they did not wish to undertake the expense, because in the Temple, no such considerations were made. As our Sages state (Tamid 3:4), “Poverty is inappropriate in a place of wealth.”

Removing the ashes is comparable to cooking food, for both are acts of preparation. Serving wine and offering sacrifices are also analogous, for both involve presenting something.

The time when the first rays of the sun become visible on the eastern horizon. According to the various opinions, this is between 72 minutes and two hours before sunrise.

Since there are many sacrifices offered during the festivals, all of the activity in the Temple is begun earlier so that there will be ample opportunity.

On Yom Kippur, all of the elements of the Temple service were performed by the High Priest. Lest he become tired, the different elements of the Temple service were spaced out as far as possible. Hence, this activity was performed earlier in the night.

See Chapter 4, Halachot 1-5, for a description of the process in which this priest was chosen.

From Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 5:4 and Tamid 26a, it appears that the intent is that a person who enters the lottery for the right to remove the ashes would immerse beforehand. See Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 5:9.

Chapter 4, Halachah 1, states that the priests would come to the lottery wearing their priestly garments. Thus the one who was chosen would remove his ordinary priestly garments and put on the garments for the removal of the ashes.

As the Rambam writes in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Tamid 1:4), a priest should not approach the altar for: any aspect of the Temple service, as implied by Exodus 30:20. See Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 5:1.

This warning was administered by the head of the clan that would serve in the Temple that day (Tifferet Yisrael, Tamid 1:4).

I.e., the side near the entrance to the Temple Building.

The Kessef Mishneh quotes authorities who mention that these coals must be from the limbs of the sacrifices that were consumed by the fire.

For when descending the altar, he would be facing the south.

The side closer to the entrance to the courtyard.

Thus he is 20 cubits from the altar, for the ramp was 30 cubits long.

Thus they are placed “near the altar,” as stated in Leviticus 6:3.

See Hilchot Ma‘aseh HaKorbanot 6:21.

Which are described in Chapter 3, Halachot 4 and 12 respectively.

As opposed to the other services in the Temple, there was no lottery made for this service. In his gloss, the Radbaz first explains that since many priests were required, there was no need to make a selection. Anyone who desired could participate. The Radbaz appreciates the apparent question that arises from the comparison to the following halachah and hence offers another explanation: that the priest who was selected to remove the ashes initially was responsible for gathering several of his priestly brethren to help complete the task.

They would hurry so that they would not remain in the Temple Courtyard without having sanctified their hands and feet (Tifferet Yisrael, Tamid 2:1).

Our translation is based on the Rambam’s Commentary to the. Mishnah (Tamid 2:1).

If they would be removed from the altar, they would be disqualified for having remained overnight. Nevertheless, while limbs and fats were on the altar themselves, they would never be disqualified.

For the ramp is considered as equivalent to the altar and the limbs are also not disqualified there.

See Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 2:7, 10.

See note 22.
The mishnah (Tamid 2:1) states that this pile would at times reach 300 kor (every kor being 2 letechim, see below). Although the Rambam states that this is an exaggeration, we can be certain that the size of the ash-heap was significant.

See Chapter 3, Halachah 6, for more details regarding this utensil.

A Talmudic measure equal to 9 kor which is equivalent to approximately 121 liter (approximately 27 gallons) according to Shiurei Torah and approximately 211 liter (48 gallons) according to Chazon Ish.

Leviticus 6:4 speaks of taking the ashes “outside the camp.” For future generations, that was interpreted as meaning “outside of Jerusalem.” The bull brought by the High Priest as a sin-offering would be burnt in the same place, as required by Leviticus 4:12. See Hilchot Ma‘aseh HaKorbanot 7:4.

Even though it was not considered part of the Temple service, as the Rambam proceeds to state.

And thus does not require immersion or wearing the priestly garments.

Our translation follows the first printings and authoritative manuscripts of the Mishneh Torah and also follows the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Temurah 7:6).

The Ra’avad questions the Rambam’s statements, noting that the prooftext he cites refers to the removal of the ashes from the altar and not depositing them outside of Jerusalem. As the Radbaz explains, the Rambam does not differentiate between the two.

See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 19:13 which mentions this prohibition. The Radbaz maintains that not only is a prohibition is involved, a person is liable for meilah, unauthorized use of sacred property, as stated in Hilchot Meilah 2:14.