Yerushalmi Sukkah 4:6 ירושלמי סוכה ד׳:ו׳

MISHNAH: How was the water libation seven days? He⁹³The priest selected to pour the water on the altar. was filling a golden flask holding three log⁹⁴About 1.6 1. from the Siloam. When they⁹⁵The procession accompanying the priest. The trumpets were blown by priests in the Temple domain. The Water gate was the South-Eastern entrance to the Temple Mount. reached the Water Gate they blew the trumpet straight, treble, and straight. He ascended the ramp and turned to his left. There were two silver bowls there; Rebbi Jehudah said that they were of lime but were darkened because of the wine. They had holes like two nostrils, one wide and one narrow so that both should finish at the same time⁹⁶The holes for the water libation were smaller than those for the wine libation since the viscosity of the wine is larger than that of the water. It therefore is presumed that the viscosity of the wine was approximately constant through the years..
The Western one¹¹³The bowl for the libations. for the water, and the Eastern one for the wine. If he poured the water into that for the wine or wine into that for the water, he accomplished his duty. Rebbi Jehudah says, one log he was pouring all eight days¹¹⁴One log, not three; for eight days, not seven.. One says to the one pouring, lift your hand, since once he¹¹⁵A Sadducee objecting to the pouring of water not justified in the Pentateuch. poured on his feet and all the people stoned him with their etrogim.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina stated, to make a procession⁹⁷Latin pompa, Greek μομπή “solemn procession”. on the occasion. Yose ben Ḥanina in the name of Menaḥem from Yodfat: It is Rebbi Aqiba’s Yose ben Ḥanina⁹⁸The Mishnah, which on a holiday permits trumpet blowing for something occurring outside the Temple precinct which otherwise would be rabbinically forbidden. Also the amount of 3 log is derived from biblical libations; Zevaḥim 110b., since Rebbi Aqiba said, the water libation is a word from the Torah⁹In Sifry Num. 250 the argument is given in the name of R. Jehudah ben Bathyra, with different arguments ascribed to R. Aqiba and R. Nathan. The argument notes that in Num. 29 the sacrifices for the different days of Tabernacles are given in stereotyped language; the words noted are deviations from the usual ונסכה, כמשפט. R. Aqiba’s argument is presented differently in the Babli, Zevaḥim 110b..

There, we have stated⁹⁹Mishnah Zevaḥim 13:6.: “Rebbi Eleazar¹⁰⁰The Tanna, ben Shamua. says, also one who pours a libation of water on Tabernacles outside of the Temple is liable¹⁰¹As a matter of principle, any sacrifice outside the Temple conducted in the way it is biblically prescribed for the Temple is a deadly sin and if performed inadvertently makes the person liable for a purification sacrifice. To state that making a water libation outside the Temple creates such a liability for the performer is stating that the libation in the Temple is biblically prescribed..” Rebbi Joḥanan said¹⁰²Babli Zevaḥim 110b., the entire system of Rebbi Eleazar is the system of his teacher Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba said, the water libation is a word from the Torah, so Rebbi Eleazar is saying, the water libation is a word from the Torah. There are Tannaim who state in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, it is necessary that the filling be for the holiday; there are Tannaim who state in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, it is not necessary that the filling be for the holiday¹⁰³Since anything sacrificed on the altar needs a dedication, and using Temple vessels for not dedicated contents is sinful, if the water libation is a biblical requirement it needs a Temple vessel and dedication of the water at the moment of filling for the holiday. If the water libation is tradition, it does not have to be drawn for its purpose from the start.. He who said, it is necessary that the filling be for the holiday, Rebbi Eleazar following Rebbi Aqiba; he who said, it is not necessary that the filling be for the holiday, Rebbi Eleazar following the rabbis. This you cannot say since Rebbi Joḥanan said, the entire system of Rebbi Eleazar is the system of his teacher Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba said, the water libation is a word from the Torah, so Rebbi Eleazar is saying, the water libation is a word from the Torah. What is the difference between them? Rebbi Ze`ira said, only if he poured three log inside and three log outside¹⁰⁴This statement is elliptic. It can be read parallel to a statement of R. Simeon ben Laqish in the Babli Zevaḥim 110b as stating that since in the Temple the libation is only valid if it is of exactly three log (a quarter of a hin, the smallest admissible libation of wine, Num. 15:4), also outside it creates liability only if it is exactly 3 log.. There are Tannaim who state, there is prescribed measure; there are Tannaim who state, there is no prescribed measure. He who said that there is prescribed measure, not liable¹⁰⁵If the measure is not exactly 3 log, since inside the Temple this is a biblical obligation.; he who said there is no prescribed measure, liable¹⁰⁶In any amount, since inside the ceremony is tradition, not Scripture..

Yose Bar Ashian in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The bowls have to be plugged at the moment of pouring. What is the reason? In the sanctuary pouring a libation of shekhar to the Eternal¹⁰⁷Babli 49b. For the cryptic quote of Num. 28:7 it is explained first in Sifry Num. 143 that the repetition הסך נסך includes not only libations of wine but also those of water; it is added in the next paragraph that שכר therefore cannot be interpreted only by the Hebrew connotation of “intoxicating drink” but also (in parallel with the Arabic שנר) “to be abundantly full (of milk), thanks, gratitude”. [Babli Sotah 49b, Tanḥuma Pinḥas 12, Pesiqta Rabbati 17 (ed. Ish-Shalom 80 a/b), Pesiqta dRav Cahana et qorbani laḥmi (ed. Buber Note 20).].

It was stated¹⁰⁸Tosephta 3:15; Babli 49a.: “Rebbi Yose says, the basis was perforated down to the abyss. What is the reason? ¹⁰⁹Is. 5:2.He turned it up, removed its stones, planted precious vine, and built a tower in its midst, this is the Temple, and a wine-press he excavated in it, this is the altar. And also an altar, that is the basis.” Rebbi Simeon says, it was work of Heaven. Since it was work of Heaven, maybe it was not beautiful like artist’s work? The verse says, the roundnesses of your hips are like hoops, formed by artist’s hands¹¹⁰Cant. 7:2.; they were more beautiful than those formed by artist’s hands. It was stated¹⁰⁸Tosephta 3:15; Babli 49a.: “Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ṣadoq said, a small opening was between the Temple Hall and the altar. Once in seventy years young priests climb down and bring it¹¹¹The congealed remainders of the wine poured on the altar as libations. up in sanctity since it was congealed like fig cakes; they come and burn it in sanctity. Just as its pouring was in sanctity, so its burning was in sanctity.” Rebbi said, the Torah let you grasp an expression of love, an expression of fullness, and an expression of inebriation¹¹²Cf. Note 107, explanation of שכר.. Rebbi Judah bar Laqqara in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: Since the Temple was destroyed, congealing wine disappeared, and white glass disappeared. What is white glass? It was flexible.

They wanted to say that the large {hole}¹¹⁶In the bowl mentioned in Mishnah 7. was for water, the small one for wine, for Rebbi Jonah said in the name of Rebbi Immi: A hole which does not let pass water passes wine, what does not let pass wine passes oil, does not let pass oil passes honey. And even if you say it is the other way¹¹⁷If one confirms by experiment that the more viscous fluid requires a larger hole, Babli 48b. around, is that not Rebbi Jehudah’s? And Rebbi Jehudah said, a log he was pouring all eight days¹¹⁸The entire part of Mishnah after R. Jehudah’s statement also is R. Jehudah’s. Since he states that the volume of water is one third of the volume of wine, it is obvious that the hole of the water bowl must be much smaller than that of the wine bowl if both bowls should simultaneously empty. For the Babli 48b his bowl must be smaller.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: If he preceded them before the sacrifice, what¹¹⁹If pouring the water is an independent sacral act it cannot be performed before the morning daily sacrifice nor after the evening daily sacrifice. If it is an appendix to the sacrifices like the libations of wine it can be performed any time, including the night following the day. Babli Ta`anit 2b.? If he poured in the night, what? If he did not pour today may he pour the next day? He said to him, let us hear from the following which Rebbi Ila said in the name of Rebbi Yasa: And its libations¹²⁰Num. 29:31, the text for the sixth day of Tabernacles., the same for libations of water as for libations of wine¹²²This paragraph is from Yoma, Halakhah 1:5, Notes 213–222.. This implies that if he preceded them before the sacrifice, it is qualified. If he poured in the night, it is qualified. If he did not pour today he may not pour the next day, because if the day passed, its sacrifice passed.

The rabbis increase the water and decrease the days; Rebbi Jehudah decreases the water and increases the days¹¹⁴One log, not three; for eight days, not seven..

¹²²This paragraph is from Yoma, Halakhah 1:5, Notes 213–222. Some want to say, he was the same for the Cow¹²³Where the Sadducees insisted that the Cohen who burns the Red Cow must be pure from the preceding sundown. However, it is difficult to square what is reported in Tosephta Parah 3:8 with what is presumed here: “It happened that a Sadducee was pure from the preceding sundown when he came to burn the Cow, but Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai realized it; he came and leaned both of his hands on him and told him, Sir High Priest, how wonderful you are as High Priest, go and immerse yourself. He went down and immersed himself. After he came back he grated his earlobe and said to him, Ben Zakkai, when I shall be free to deal with you; he answered him, if you will be free. It was not three days before they put him in the grave.”
Biblical impurity is only original impurity and derivative impurity in the first degree. Rabbinic impurity has derivative impurity in the second degree for unwashed hands, third degree impurity for heave, and fourth degree for sacrifices. Therefore, the intrinsically pure Ben Zakkai (who before the destruction of the Temple was not Rabban), by putting his second degree impure hands on the priest defiled the latter for sacra and forced him to immerse himself in a miqweh. Our sources seem to describe the Sadducee position correctly; cf. Dead Sea Scrolls fragment 4Q394, lines 16–18., on Tabernacles, and on the Day of Atonement¹²⁴Reported in Yoma 1:5, Note 211. He followed Sadducee doctrine in bringing the incense into the Holiest of Holies, and died soon after.. Rebbi Simon does not say so, but either the Cow and Tabernacles were one and Atonement one, or Cow and Atonement were one and Tabernacles one. He who said, after a short time he died, he did all three. He who said, his nose gushed out worms and something like a calf’s hoof grew in his brain, follows him who said, either Cow and Tabernacles were one and Atonement one, or Cow and Atonement were one and Tabernacles one. The Courtyard cried about them, get out of here, sons of Eli, you defiled our God’s Temple. “On that day, the corner of the altar was damaged and they put a block of salt there lest it should look deficient since any altar without corner, or walkway, or base is damaged.¹²⁵Tosephta Sukkah 3:16; Babli 48b.”

They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written¹²⁶Lev. 16:17., nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written¹²⁷Ez. 1:10. If the offending priest was hit on his head by a calf’s foot it must have been by one of the four-headed angels seen by Ezechiel whose feet are calves’ feet (Ez. 1:7)., the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting? He answered them, if he enters following normal rules.