A Must-Read January 9, 2025 Q When called up for Maftir, do I need to…
With Bells On: Where Were the Pa’amonim Heard?
Adapted from the writings of Dayan Yitzhak Grossman
December 19, 2024
Arutz Sheva reports:
Minister of Heritage Amichai Eliyahu met with British author and journalist Douglas Murray on Tuesday evening in Jerusalem.
During the meeting, the minister surprised Murray by presenting him with an ancient bell that was part of the High Priest’s clothing. Murray, who is known for his vast interest in Jewish history and tradition, was moved by the historical artifact.
“The sound of these bells,” Minister Eliyahu explained, “would herald the entry of the High Priest into the Holy of Holies of the Temple. This bell carries within it a thousand-year-old story of holiness and tradition.”
“There are moments when history literally touches you,” Murray shared emotionally. “You can read thousands of books about the Temple, but when you touch an object that was actually there, you experience a completely different feeling. There is something exciting about being able to touch this history. In an age when everything is digital and momentary, such an object reminds us of the depth and meaning of Jewish tradition…”[1]
This is presumably the bell found by Israeli archaeologists Eli Shukron and Ronny Reich more than a decade ago. Indeed, Eliyahu’s description of the bell’s function seems taken from Shukron’s:
We are before Yom Kippur, and this has great significance—the sound of the golden bell, which was so significant to the inhabitants of Yerushalayim of that era. The High Priest entered the Holy of Holies, exited the Holy of Holies, everything was okay—this was the emotion felt by the inhabitants of Yerushalayim! We are before Yom Kippur, and we are able to hear the sound of the bell that the people heard upon the exit of the High Priest from the Holy of Holies. This is the only object that was in the Holy of Holies that we can state with certainty, “This is the object that was in the Holy of Holies!”—the golden bell of the High Priest.[2]
A distinguished Israeli archaeologist and an Israeli Minister of Heritage should surely know better than to claim that the High Priest wore bells into the Holy of Holies. The Robe (me’il), one of the eight vestments normally worn by the Kohein Gadol, did indeed have bells attached to it, in order that “its sound shall be heard when he enters the Sanctuary (hakodesh) before Hashem and when he leaves, so that he not die.”[3] But “hakodesh” here refers to the Kodesh (Holy)—not the Kodesh Hakadashim (Holy of Holies), in which only four garments, not including the me’il, were worn:
And Hashem said to Moshe: Speak to Aharon, your brother—he shall not come at all times into the Sancuary, within the Curtain, in front of the Cover that is upon the Ark…With this shall Aharon come into the Sanctuary…He shall don a sacred linen Tunic; linen Breeches shall be upon his flesh, he shall gird himself with a linen Sash, and cover his head with a linen Turban…[4]
As the Gemara explains:
For Rav Chisda said: For what reason does the Kohein Gadol not enter the Innermost Sanctum (the Kodesh Hakadashim) in the golden vestments to perform the avodah on Yom Kippur? Because an accuser cannot become a defender. (Gold stands as an accuser of Klal Yisrael, as it recalls the Eigel Hazahav, so it may not be worn while seeking atonement for Klal Yisrael.)[5]
The truth is, however, that greater scholars than Eliyahu have apparently made the same error.
R’ Volf Heidenheim
R’ Volf Heidenheim—a man the Chasam Sofer described as “the perfect scholar (hechacham hashaleim)”—spent much time correcting the liturgical poems (piyutim) and translating them into German, “and were it not for him, the piyutim would have been forgotten.”[6] In at least one early edition of his celebrated Roedelheim machzor for Yom Kippur, he explained the phrase in the piyut Amitz Ko’ach, “kish tze’adav lefarachos vekeirav labadim (his (the Kohein Gadol’s) footsteps were heard between the curtains as he neared the staves (of the Aron))” as referring to “the sound of his footsteps via the bells.”[7] The erroneousness of this was already noted by the Tiferes Yisrael (R’ Yisrael Lipschitz): “With all due respect, he has erred in this, for [the Kohein Gadol] was not garbed in the golden garments.”[8]
Rav Heidenheim seems to have eventually realized his error, for in a later edition of his Yom Kippur machzor, his explanation of the phrase “kish tze’adav” is entirely different: “the sound of the knocking of his walking, as in the phrase (Bechoros 7:6) ‘knocks with his ankles (makish bekarsulav).’”[9]
Rashbam
The Torah Temimah (R’ Baruch Epstein), too, critiques “some mefarshim” of Amitz Ko’ach for making this obvious error, but then adds that the same question can be asked on no less a figure than the Rashbam. In his commentary to the aforementioned command that the sound of the me’il of the Kohein Gadol “shall be heard when he enters the Sanctuary,” the Rashbam explains:
Since Hakadosh Baruch Hu has commanded that “Any person shall not be in the Tent of Meeting when he comes to provide atonement in the Sanctuary until his departure,”[10] therefore Hakadosh Baruch Hu commanded that “its sound shall be heard when he enters,” and those who hear it will distance themselves from there.”[11]
Since the context of the command that “any person shall not be in the Tent of Meeting when he comes to provide atonement in the Sanctuary” is the Kohein Gadol’s service on Yom Kippur in the Kodesh Hakadashim, the Rashbam is apparently assuming that the Kohein Gadol wore the me’il into the Kodesh Hakadashim:
And behold there is no end to wonder. It is true that we find that liturgical poets have sometimes explained not in accordance with the halacha, but here, how difficult are these things.[12]
As with the Torah Temimah’s critique of the commentators to Amitz Ko’ach, where he was preceded by the Tiferes Yisrael, the difficulty he raises with the comments of the Rashbam was previously noted by Haksav Vehakabalah (R’ Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg), who adds that while Chazal apparently understood the admonition that “Any person shall not be in the Tent of Meeting when he comes to provide atonement in the Sanctuary” to extend to the daily burning of the ketores (incense) in the Kodesh—in which context it is a command to vacate the area between the Ulam (Entrance Hall) and the mizbeiach hachitzon (External Altar)[13]—this burning of the ketores could be performed even by an ordinary kohein, who did not wear the me’il.[14]
Although Rav Mecklenburg contends that the purpose of bells worn exclusively by the Kohein Gadol could not have been to warn people to vacate the area between the Ulam and the mizbeiach during the service in the Kodesh, because such service did not need to be performed by the Kohein Gadol, R’ Mendel Weinbach argues that according to the Rashbam, that was indeed their purpose, to warn people to vacate the area when it was the Kohein Gadol who was performing the service:
This problem disappears, however, when we learn in our Gemara[15] that the requirement for vacating an area of the Bais Hamikdash while sacred service was being performed was not limited to the Kohein Gadol’s entry into the Kodesh Hakadashim on Yom Kippur. The blood of the bull brought as the Kohein Gadol’s special sin offering (Vayikra 4:6), or brought for the community to atone for a mistaken court ruling (ibid. 4:17), or of the goat brought by the community when such a mistake involved idol worship (Bemidbar 15:26), had to be sprinkled in the Heichal. When the kohein entered the Heichal for this purpose, everyone had to depart not only from there but also from the area between the altar in the courtyard and the entrance to the Sanctuary. The Gemara derives this from the word “atonement” used regarding such a need for removal on Yom Kippur, which teaches us (through a gzeirah shavah according to Tosfos or a binyan av according to the Rambam) that this rule applies to all situations when the kohein enters the Sanctuary for atonement purposes. The aforementioned commentaries are, therefore, referring to a situation where such service is being performed by the Kohein Gadol, and the bells on his me’il do indeed sound a warning for all to clear the area and enable this servant with a higher degree of spirituality to be alone with his King.[16]
R’ Moshe Cheifetz
Rav Mecklenburg cites another scholar who seems to have made the error of assuming that the Kohein Gadol wore bells into the Kodesh Hakadashim: the 17th century Italian rav R’ Moshe Cheifetz:
We do not know the advantage of the melody of the bells, that its sound shall be heard, and if not, he will die. Does Hashem not prefer a still, thin sound?[17]
But the truth is that the correct understanding of the matter is as Chazal have said, that the Kohein Gadol on Yom Kippur would pray a short prayer, in order not to alarm Klal Yisrael[18] to suspect him of being a Tzduki and say that he died inside the Kodesh Hakadashim.[19] The Divine wisdom therefore devised the stratagem of the bells, that he should play a melody with his feet as he walked, and the nation outside would hear the movement of his feet and would know that he had not died. This was the intention of the pasuk, “Its sound shall be heard when he enters and when he leaves,” even when he is before Hashem, that he did not die, and he will not alarm Klal Yisrael.[20]
(Rav Cheifetz seems to be creatively interpreting “Its sound shall be heard when he enters the Sanctuary…so that he not die” to mean that its sound being heard will serve as an indication that he has not died.)
Rav Mecklenburg notes that once again, this is erroneous, for when the Kohein Gadol was inside the Kodesh Hakadashim he was wearing the bigdei lavan, without the me’il.
[1]Hezki Baruch. Douglas Murray moved by ancient High Priest’s bell. Israel National News–Arutz Sheva. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/399478.
[2]Meyuchad LeYom Kippur: “Kach Nishme’u Tzlilei Pa’amon Hazahav Shel Hakohein Hagadol.” YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVcOIdkGEjE. Cf. here.
[6]Shu”t Chasam Sofer C.M. siman 89
[7]Machzor (Minhag Polin) LeYom Kippur (Roedelheim 5567–Second Edition), Musaf p. 33b.
[8]Tiferes Yisrael, Yoma, Hilchesa Gevirta to perek 4.
[9]Machzor LeYom Kippur Livnei Ashkenaz Vehanohagim Minhagam (Roedelheim 5592–Sixth Edition), Musaf p. 33a. It is noteworthy that the Tiferes Yisrael there also points out the erroneousness of another explanatory note of Rav Heidenheim (to a phrase several lines later in Amitz Ko’ach), and this note as well was revised in the later edition, seemingly in response to the objection raised by the Tiferes Yisrael.
Cf. Hamachzor Hameforash, Yom Kippur (Weingarten: Yerushalayim 5747) p. 652 n. 74.
[12]Torah Temimah Vayikra 16:4 n. 16.
[14]Haksav Vehakabalah Shmos 28:35.
[15]Yoma 43a-44b.
[16]Rabbi Mendel Weinbach. Saved by the Bells. Ohr Somayach. https://ohr.edu/this_week/the_weekly_daf/306.
[17]See Melachim I 19:12.
[18]Mishnah Yoma 5:1. Cf. here.
[20]Meleches Machsheves (Cheifetz) Shmos 28:35. Cf. here; here.
Related Posts
