Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 48) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 314) include the offering of these sacrifices as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. These sacrifices are mentioned in Numbers 29:7-8.
In the Mishnah (Yoma 7:3). This follows the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi (Yoma 70b) who maintains that the ram mentioned in Leviticus 16:5 is the same mentioned in Numbers. See also Hilchot Avodat Yom HaKippurim 1:1.
After the conclusion of the fast.
See Leviticus 16:27; Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 1:16.
As mentioned in Leviticus 16:5-9. See Hilchot Avodat Yom HaKippurim, ch. 3, for a description of the service performed with these goats.
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 50) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 320) include the offering of these sacrifices as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. These sacrifices are mentioned in Numbers 29:12-34.
The fact that the sacrifices of each day of Sukkot differ from each other endow the days of the holiday with an advantage over the days of the holiday of Pesach. For that reason, the full Hallel is recited on each of the days of Sukkot, while this is not true with regard to Pesach. Nevertheless, the fact that the sacrifices differ is not sufficient for each day to be considered a separate mitzvah.
Literally, “the eighth day of assembly.”
Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 51) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 322) include the offering of these sacrifices as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. These sacrifices are mentioned in Numbers 29:35-38.
I.e., it is not a continuation of the Sukkot offerings. As Rosh HaShanah 4b, et al, state there are six aspects in which Shemini Atzeret is considered as an independent festival. One of them is that it has its own sacrifice.
In connection with the water libation, a special celebration, Simchat Beit HaShoevah was held in the Temple Courtyard. The Rambam describes that celebration and the immensity of the joy expressed at that time at the conclusion of Hilchot Shofar Sukkah VeLulav. Interestingly, however, in that source, he does not associate the celebration with the water libation and here, he does not mention the celebration.
A practice that is part of the Oral Law, but is not specifically mentioned in the Written Law. As the Rambam mentions in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sukkah 4:8), there are allusions to this practice in the Written. Law.
I.e., initially, this is the preferred manner of observing the mitzvah.
I.e., after the fact; the initial preference is that each be poured separately as the Rambam proceeds to explain. The Radbaz explains that since ultimately, when the wine and the water reach the shittin, they will be mixed together, after the fact, it is acceptable if they were mixed together initially.
As stated in Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 4:5, libations offered in connection with a sacrifice must be offered by day, but those offered independently may be offered at night.
See Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 2:11 which explains that these were two cavities in the southwest corner of the Altar, through which the blood would run off and flow through the drainage canal and from there, to the Kidron River.
See Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 2:1 and the discussion of the Rambam’s ruling by the other commentaries.
A log is 346 cc according to Shiurei Torah and 600 cc according to Chazon Ish.
A stream that is located on the southern side of the Temple Mount.
One of the gates located on the south side of the Temple Courtyard. It was given its name, because the water for the libation was brought in through it.
See Hilchot K’lei HaMikdash 7:6.
Usually, the priests would circle the altar, turning first to the right. In this instance, they would tum to the left, lest the smoke affect the water and the wine (Sukkah 48b; Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 7:11).
In his gloss to Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 2:1, the Kessef Mishneh states that these cups were not a permanent part of the altar, but placed there only during the Sukkot holiday.
So that it would be obvious that he is pouring the water in the altar’s cups (Rav Yosef Corcus).
Rather than on the altar.
Lit., “a follower of Tzadok.” The Sadducees represented a splinter group within Judaism. They accepted the Written Law, but not the Oral Law. [In truth, they wanted to abandon Jewish practice entirely, but realized that they could never attract a large number of followers with such an approach and hence, adopted this ruse (the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah, Avot 1:3)]. Since the water libation is not explicitly stated in the Written Law, the Sadducees did not accept its validity.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sukkah 4:9), the Rambam gives an original interpretation for the reason the water should not be held in a sacred vessel. Were it to be held in a sacred vessel, it would be possible that the priests would sanctify their hands with it. Thus they would perform that rite with water that was not consecrated or would use up the water and prevent it from being used for the libation (Rav Kappach’s notes to that mishnah). This represents a different approach than that of the other commentaries.
With water from the Shiloach Stream.
This change was necessary, for going down to fill the pitcher with water from the stream was forbidden on the Sabbath, because one would be carrying from a public domain to a private domain.
Water that was uncovered is unacceptable as a libation, as stated in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 6:10.
I.e., in addition to the song recited for the daily sacrifice. See also Chapter 6, Halachot 8-9 which describe the Levites’ songs.
This psalm contains the verse “The voice of God is upon the water” and thus is appropriate to mark the beginning of the offering of the water libation (see Sukkah 55a).
This psalm warns against coming to the Temple to celebrate and offer sacrifices without first repenting (Rashi, Sukkah, op. cit.).
From this verse until the end of the psalm. These verses were chosen, because they speak of confronting wicked powers. Our Sages ordained that it be recited in the Second Temple period when the Temple was under the authority of Persian, Greek, and Roman rulers (ibid.).
I.e., from verse 5 until verse 16. These verses speak about God’s watchful eye that surveys man’s actions. These verses were chosen, because Sukkot marks the end of the harvest season when the agricultural gifts must be given to the poor. These verses serve as a warning, impressing the people with the awareness that God is observing them at all times and seeing whether they give these gifts or not.
Until the end of the psalm. These verses contain words of comfort and the reassurance of Divine blessings.
These verses speak of Divine judgement and Hoshaana Rabbah, the day on which these verses are recited, marks the conclusion of the judgment begun on Rosh HaShanah.
The song for the additional offering of the Sabbath (a portion of the song Ha’azinu, as mentioned in chapter 6, Halacha 9) is recited on that day and the songs for the remaining days are pushed back a day (Kesser Mishneh).
Hilchot K’lei HaMikdash 4:3-4.
Because the number of bulls are being reduced by one each day. See Halachot 3-4 above.
When there are far fewer sacrifices, as stated in Halachah 5.
The Radbaz infers from this that no lotteries were conducted during the prior seven days. Although there were some days when one watch received more sheep to offer than another, they would balance that matter by allowing the other watches to receive more the following days.
There were two watches that did not offer three bulls throughout the Sukkot holiday. One opinion in Sukkot 55b maintains that on Shemini Atzeret, the lottery to offer the bull should be held only between these two watches. The Rambam accepts the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi which maintains that all the watches are included in this lottery.
According to the guidelines established in Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 2:4, for the additional offerings of Sukkot, the thirteen bulls required a total of 39 esronim, the two rams, a total of 4 esronim, and the fourteen sheep, a total of 14 esronim, a total of 57 esronim. In addition, two esronim were brought for the additional offering of the Sabbath, and two esronim for the continuous offerings.
This includes the wine and the oil as well as the meal, as indicated by the concluding halachot of the chapter.
Indeed, if the meal-offerings for two types of animals become intermingled before they are mixed together with their oil, they are disqualified [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Menachot 9:4)].
The rationale for the separation is that the ratio of oil to meal is different for the offerings of sheep and bulls.
The Sifra derives this concept from Leviticus 3:11 which states “And he shall offer it on the pyre,” using a singular form.
I.e., those of bulls, those of sheep, and those of rams.
As required by Halachah 15.
For the rationale for the restriction against mixing their wine libations is only to prevent their meal-offerings from being intermingled. Once the meal-offerings have been offered, there is no longer any need for that constraint (Menachot 89b). They may be mixed as an initial preference [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit.)]. See Halachah 20.
For as stated in Hilchot Ma’aselr HaKorbanot 2:12, the wine libations may be brought several days after the sacrifice was offered.
In Halachah 18.
