Daf Ditty Yoma 44:The Seven Types of Gold

Iron pyrite or "fool's gold"

1
Does incense effect atonement? The Torah mentions the concept of atonement only with regard
to offerings. Yes, as Rabbi Ḥananya teaches in a baraita: We learned of the incense that it
effects atonement, as it is stated:

2
 ,‫יב ַו ִיַּקּח ַאֲהֹרן ַכֲּאֶשׁר ִדֶּבּר ֹמֶשׁה‬ 12 And Aaron took as Moses spoke, and ran into the
‫ ְוִהֵנּה ֵהֵחל‬,‫ ַהָקָּהל‬S‫תּוֹ‬-‫ַוָיּ ָרץ ֶאל‬ midst of the assembly; and behold, the plague was begun
,‫ַהְקֹּט ֶרת‬-‫ ֶאת‬,‫ ָבָּﬠם; ַו ִיֵּתּן‬,‫ַהֶנֶּגף‬ among the people; and he put on the incense and made
.‫ָהָﬠם‬-‫ ַﬠל‬,‫ַו ְיַכֵפּר‬ atonement for the people.
Num 17:12

“And he put on the incense and made atonement for the people” And the school of Rabbi
Yishmael taught: For what does incense effect atonement? For slander.

And why is that? Let something that is done in secret, i.e., the incense, which is burned in
seclusion within the Sanctuary, come and effect atonement for an act done in secret, i.e.,
slander, which is generally said in private.

RASHI

Steinzaltz

3
We learned in a Mishna there: They remove themselves from the area between the Entrance
Hall and the altar during the burning of the incense. Rabbi Elazar said: They taught that this
is true only during the burning of the incense of the Sanctuary, but during the burning of the
incense in the innermost chamber, i.e., the Holy of Holies, people are required to remove
themselves only from the Sanctuary. They do not need to remove themselves from the area
between the Entrance Hall and the altar.

Rav Adda bar Ahava raised an objection to Rabbi Elazar’s opinion from a baraita, and some
say it unattributed: Rabbi Yosei says: Just as they remove themselves from the area between
the Entrance Hall and the altar during the burning of the incense, they similarly remove
themselves during the blood presentations of the bull of the anointed priest, i.e., of the High
Priest, which he brings if he issues an erroneous halakhic ruling and acts upon it; and also during
the blood presentations of the bull for an unwitting communal sin brought if the Sanhedrin issues
an erroneous halakhic ruling and the community acts upon it; and also during the blood
presentations of the goats of idol worship brought for an inadvertent communal transgression of
idol worship.

The baraita continues: If so, what higher standard is applicable to the Sanctuary relative to the
area between the Entrance Hall and the altar? Only that those in the Sanctuary remove
themselves both during the incense burning and also during the blood presentations, which is

4
not during the incense burning. Those who are in the area between the Entrance Hall and the
altar remove themselves only during the incense burning but not during the blood presentations.

§ The Mishna states: On every other day, a priest would scoop up the coals with a coal pan made
of silver and pour the coals from there into a coal pan of gold. The Gemara asks: What is the
reason the gold pan was not used to scoop the coals? The Gemara answers: Because the Torah
spared the money of the Jewish people. Since the pan is worn away with use, it is preferable to
use a less expensive silver pan.

§ The Mishna continues: But on this day, on Yom Kippur, the High Priest scoops up with a coal
pan of gold, and with that coal pan, he would bring the coals into the Holy of Holies. The Gemara
asks: What is the reason that on Yom Kippur only one pan is used? Due to the weakness of the
High Priest. He has to perform the entire service by himself while fasting; using only one pan
minimizes his exertion.

§ The Mishna continues: But on this day, on Yom Kippur, the High Priest scoops up with a coal
pan of gold, and with that coal pan, he would bring the coals into the Holy of Holies. The Gemara
asks: What is the reason that on Yom Kippur only one pan is used? Due to the weakness of the
High Priest. He has to perform the entire service by himself while fasting; using only one pan
minimizes his exertion.

RASHI

5
Steinzaltz

Jastrow

§ The Mishna states: On every other day, it was of greenish gold but on this day it was of a red
gold. Rav Ḥisda said: There are seven types of gold mentioned in the Bible: Gold, and good
gold, and gold of Ophir (I Kings 10:11), and glistering gold (I Kings 10:18), and shaḥut gold
(I Kings 10:17), and closed gold (I Kings 10:21), and parvayim gold (II Chronicles 3:6).

The Gemara explains the reason for these names: There is a distinction between gold and good
gold, as it is written in the verse: “And the gold of that land is good” (Genesis 2:12), which
indicates the existence of gold of a higher quality. Gold of Ophir is gold that comes from Ophir.
Glistering [mufaz] gold is so named.

6
Summary

Rav Avrohom Adler writes:1

The Mishna had stated: On other days, he would take them out with a silver shovel. The Gemora
explains the reason for this: The Torah has consideration for the money of Israel.

The Mishna had stated: Today (on Yom Kippur), he took them out with a golden shovel, in which
he was to bring them in: The Gemora explains the reason for this (that it wasn’t poured from one
shovel to another): It was because of the weakness of the Kohen Gadol. The Mishna had stated:
On other days, he would scoop them up with a shovel containing four kavin.

A Tanna taught: One kav of the coals became scattered (during his pouring), and he swept it into
the canal. The Gemora asks: There is one braisa that teaches that it was one kav, and another that
it was two kavin. Now, it is quite right according to the one which teaches ‘one kav,’ for it is in
accordance with that which the Rabbis said, but the one that taught ‘two kavin,’ is not in
accordance with the Rabbis or with Rabbi Yosi!?

Rav Chisda said: It is Rabbi Yishmael, the son of Rabbi Yochanan ben Berokah, for it was taught:
Rabbi Yochanan ben Berokah said: He brought the coals in a shovel containing two kavin. Rav
Ashi said: You can also say that it is in accordance with Rabbi Yosi, and he said it as follows: On
other days he would take them up with a shovel containing a se’ah of the Wilderness (which was
equal to five Jerusalem kavin) and pour it into one containing three Jerusalem kavin (which meant
that two kavin remained).

The Mishna had stated: On other days, the shovel was heavy, but this day, it was light: A Tanna
taught: On other days it (its sides) was of thick metal, but this day, it was thin. The Mishna had
stated: On other days, its handle was short, but this day, it was long: The Gemora explains the
reason for this: It was that the arm of the Kohen Gadol may support it. A Tanna taught: On other
days, it had no ring (attached to the handle), today it had one; these are the words of the son of the
Segan.

The Mishna had stated: On other days, its gold was yellowish. Rav Chisda said: There are seven
kinds of gold: gold; good gold; gold of Ophir; fine gold; spun gold; closed gold; parvayim gold.
Rav Ashi said: There are but five varieties of gold, each having gold and good gold.

From the Gemora it is evident that there is a prohibition from the torah not to be in the Heichal
(Ohel Moed) at the time when the kohen gadol is performing the avodas haketores.

This is learned from a verse. It is asked by the Acharonim as to why the Rishonim who list all the
mitzvos in the Torah omit this particular one? Why is it not counted as its own commandment?

1
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Yoma_44.pdf

7
Rav Yeruchem Fishel Perlow in his explanation to the Resag (183) answers with an innovative
approach to the issur. He explains that the issur is not on the individual (gavra) to make sure that
he is not in that particular area of the Beis Hamikdosh during the avodas haketores. The mitzva is
that the ketores should be done in the correct method.

One of the dinim of the ketores is that there should not be anybody there throughout the avodas
haketores. If someone was there, that renders the ketores invalid. Accordingly, this is why it is not
regarded as its own mitzva. It is not an independent mitzva, rather it is a component in the mitzva
of ketores. One of the proofs that he brings is from our Gemora which states the reason for this
prohibition. The ketores which is brought in a secret place, atones for the sin which one tends to
perform in private, namely loshon hora.

Analyzing the comparison, the sinner in private is compared to the kohen doing the ketores secretly
and that is where the issur is - the performing of the ketores incorrectly, not in the person who
entered during the avodah. Another proof is from a Yerushalmi that relates the story with Shimon
Hatzadik on Yom Kippur.

The Yerushalmi asks (quoted by the Rishonim on daf 39), how could someone be in the Ohel
Moed at that time and even the heavenly angels whose faces are like a person are included in the
passuk of v'chol adam? The Yerushalmi answers that it was the shechina and not a malach or a
person. The question on this is obvious.

The Torah is not given to malachim, why is it necessary to expound from the passuk that malachim
cannot be in the heichal during this time? Once again, it is evident that the issur is not on the person
or malach entering, rather on the kohen, there is an obligation to perform the ketores correctly and
that is only if there is nobody else around, including melachim.

ENTERING THE AREA BETWEEN THE ULAM AND MIZBE'ACH

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:2

The Gemara discusses Perishah, the requirement that everyone stay away from a certain part of
the Beis HaMikdash while the Kohen performs a certain Avodah. RASHI (DH Ma'alos d'Oraisa)
explains that according to all opinions, the only Perishah required mid'Oraisa on days other than
Yom Kippur is the requirement to stay out of the Heichal while the Ketores is offered inside the
Heichal on the Mizbe'ach ha'Penimi. The requirement to stay away from any place outside of the
Heichal, such as the area between the Ulam and Mizbe'ach, is only a Gezeirah mid'Rabanan.

Why did the Rabanan enact a Gezeirah that one not enter the area between the Ulam and Mizbe'ach
while the Ketores is being offered in the Heichal? Rashi explains that the Rabanan feared that if
one would be permitted to enter the area between the Ulam and Mizbe'ach, he might accidentally
walk into the Heichal (an Isur d'Oraisa) while the Ketores is being offered. Therefore, they decreed
that one must stay far away from the Heichal.

2
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/yoma/insites/yo-dt-044.htm

8
If the Rabanan enacted a Gezeirah in order to prevent a person from accidentally entering the
Heichal, then why did they not make such a Gezeirah on Yom Kippur as well? On Yom Kippur,
the Torah forbids any person from entering the Heichal while the Ketores is being offered in the
Kodesh ha'Kodashim (44a). Nevertheless, there is no prohibition, not even mid'Rabanan, against
entering the area between the Ulam and Mizbe'ach. Why did the Rabanan not enact the same
Gezeirah for Yom Kippur that they enacted for the rest of the year when the Ketores is being
offered in the Heichal?

The RITVA (44a) points out that Rashi (DH Aval b'Sha'as Haktarah) addresses this question when
he says that since the outer Mizbe'ach is "far from where the Ketores is burned on Yom Kippur"
(i.e. the Kodesh ha'Kodashim), there is no need to prohibit entry into the area between the Ulam
and Mizbe'ach.

Why is there no need to enact such a prohibition? Even though that area is far from the Kodesh
ha'Kodashim where the Kohen Gadol burns the Ketores, it is not far from the Heichal, which one
is still forbidden to enter mid'Oraisa!

The Ritva explains that the only fear is that one will attempt to peer into the Heichal in order to
see the Avodah of the Ketores, and as he does so he will inadvertently enter the Heichal. On Yom
Kippur, though, when the Ketores is burned in the Kodesh ha'Kodashim, a person will not attempt
to peer into the Heichal because he knows that there is nothing there to see. Since he will not try
to peer inside, there is no fear that he will accidentally enter the Heichal.

TOSFOS HA'ROSH understands that Rashi means that nobody will enter the Heichal when the
Kohen Gadol offers the Ketores on Yom Kippur, because everybody stands with much greater awe
of the offering of the Ketores in the Kodesh ha'Kodashim. When Rashi writes that it is far away
from the place of the Haktarah, he is explaining why the Rabanan did not prohibit one from
entering the area between the Ulam and Mizbe'ach on Yom Kippur as a preventative measure for
the rest of the year (if one is permitted to go there on Yom Kippur, perhaps he will mistakenly
think that he is permitted to go there on other days). Rashi is saying that people will not confuse
Yom Kippur with any other day, because on Yom Kippur the Ketores is offered far away from the
Ulam, and thus there is no reason for people to confuse it with the offering of the Ketores in the
Heichal during the rest of the year.

RITVA and TOSFOS YESHANIM suggest another answer. On Yom Kippur, the Rabanan
preferred not to prohibit one from standing between the Ulam and Mizbe'ach, because they wanted
other Kohanim to stand there as sentinels to watch the Kohen Gadol in the Heichal. This was done
so that the Kohen Gadol would know that his actions were being observed and, if he was a Tzeduki,
he would be afraid to place the Ketores on the coals before his entry into the Kodesh ha'Kodashim.

9
 How is this day different than all other days?

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:3

The Mishnah (43b) describes a number of differences between the way the ketoret was prepared
by the kohen gadol on Yom Kippur and the way it was done on a regular day. For example, every
day the coals needed for burning the ketoret would be picked up with a silver mahtah (=shovel)
and then transferred to a golden one, while on Yom Kippur a golden mahtah was used to pick up
the coals and that same shovel was used to carry the ketoret into the kodesh ha-kodashim.

The Gemara on our daf explains that ordinarily the golden machtah was not used to pick up the
coals because the Torah was concerned about the cost of golden shovels and the need to replace
them were they used for this work on a regular basis. On Yom Kippur, aside from giving particular
honor to the avodah (=service) of the day, allowing the entire process to be done with
one machtah was easier on the kohen gadol, who was responsible for the entire Yom
Kippur service.

Our Gemara also quotes a baraita that mentions a difference between the daily ketoret and that
of Yom Kippur that is not mentioned in the Mishnah. Ben ha-Segan points out that only
the ketoret of the Yom Kippur service had a neoshtik.

The source for the term neoshtik is unclear. Some suggest that its source is Persian, while others
identify it as being borrowed from the Latin Nasticiun. According to the vast majority of the
commentaries, it is a covering of some sort. The Tosafot Yeshanim say it was a cover for the
handle of the machtah. This was necessary on Yom Kippur because the hot coals remained in the
shovel for a fairly long time, and this made the handle of the machtah difficult to hold. The
explanation presented by the Geonim – which also appears to be the explanation given by
the Jerusalem Talmud – is that it was a cover for the shovel itself, whose purpose was to keep the
coals burning by protecting them.

Rashi understands the word otherwise and argues that the neoshtik were two rings that were placed
on the machtah so that they would make noise as the machtah was carried. The Me’iri suggests
that it was a type of flat bottom that was added to the machtah, allowing it to be easily placed on
the ground.

The ketores had the power to atone for leshon hara, for both are done quietly.4

3
https://www.ou.org/life/torah/masechet_yoma_4450/
4
https://dafdigest.org/masechtos/Yoma%20044.pdf

10
Why is ketores considered to be a quiet activity? Rashi (Arachim 16a) explains that the ketores is
brought in the ‫היכל‬, which is a private place, away from public view. In fact, no one was allowed
to be in the ‫ היכל‬together with the kohen at the moment the ketores was brought.
Tosafos HaRosh proposes that perhaps the sprinkling of the blood of the bull of Yom Kippur
should also be considered a private and quiet action, which should atone for leshon hara, for it,
too, was done in the ‫ היכל‬.

He answers that the sprinkling was done while the kohen counted verbally, “One, one and one,
one and two…” while the ketores was placed upon the coals in silence. Rebeinu Elyakim explains
that ketores refers to the incense, which was burned in the kodesh kodashim, which was a place
which was uniquely private.

The Gemara (Zevachim 88b) point out a contradiction. We find that the ‫ מעיל‬atoned for leshon
hara. The vest of the kohen had bells, and it is fitting that an audible garment should atone for an
audible sin. What, is it then, asks the Gemara, that atones for leshon hara? Was it the ketores or
the ‫??מעיל‬

The Gemara answers that ketores atones for “private” leshon hara (‫ )בצינעא‬while the ‫ מעיל‬with its
bells atones for “public” leshon hara (‫ )בפרהסיא‬Gevuros Ari and Sfas Emes both ask that the source
from which we learn that ketores atones for leshon hara is from the incident in Bemidbar (16:17)
where the nation complained about the demise of Korach, and the ketores was used to quell a
plague which ensued.

This was clearly a case of “public” leshon hara. How, then, can the Gemara say that ketores atone
for “private” leshon hara? Sfas Emes answers that the precise complaint of the people in Bemidbar
17:6 was subtle. “The entire assembly complained.” Although the verse elaborates, the extended
accusation against Moshe and Aharon that “You have killed the people of Hashem” was not stated,
but only implicit from their words. This constituted “private” leshon hara, for which ketores atones.

Chazal say that lashon hara brings no physical pleasure to the speaker, much in the way that a
snake enjoys no physical benefit from biting. Avnei Nezer, zt”l, explains that this is why the
incense atones for the sin of leshon hara. During the actual burning of the incense, the Kohen
Gadol experiences no physical pleasure from the odor. Chazal stated that even he cannot be
physically present while he stands within the cloud of the incense, for “no man shall be in the ‫אהל‬
‫“ )מועד‬...Vayikra Rabbah 16:17, #21).

How, then, could he have stood in that place but yet not be present? When ‫ הקדש רוח‬rested on him
in the kodesh kodashim, it elevated him to the level of an angel, in a state of complete
transcendence of his physical senses. This uplifting was a result of the Kohen Gadol’s selflessness,

11
his lack of expectation of receiving any material reward from the avodah. The Mei HaShiloach,
zt”l, writes that, in this respect, the Kohen Gadol represents the gadol hador.

Like the Kohen Gadol, the Torah leader of the generation often does not derive any gain from his
toil on behalf of the Jewish people. This is why their words are able to bestow spiritual life for all
time—because everything they do is for the sake of Heaven.

Rav Leib, zt”l, the son of the Chofetz Chaim, zt”l, once asked his father a question that touched
on this subject. “Father, will people ever know and understand how hard you worked and how
much effort you put into writing each and every word of the Mishnah Berurah?” The Chofetz
Chaim replied, “What does it matter if no one praises me or even comprehends how much work
went into its writing? If they don’t realize that they should be grateful for all my efforts, what
difference does it make? Do I toil to receive their applause? My only desire is to honor Hashem—
and He knows all about every single effort I expended!”

Sweet smelling smoke.

RACHEL SCHEINERMAN WRITES:5
Tashlich is a Jewish ritual, dating to the Middle Ages, that involves tossing bread into a live body
of water between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.

The bread symbolizes a person’s sins, and the water is meant to wash them away. This practice
has spawned a whole genre of contemporary jokes. What do you toss into the water to atone for
ordinary sins? White bread. For darker sins, you’ll need pumpernickel. Waffles atone for sins of
indecision and pretzels for twisted acts. French bread atones for exotic sins; stoned wheat and
poppy seed rolls are for drug use. You get the idea.

The ritual of Tashlich resonates with the scapegoat at the center of the ancient Yom Kippur service.
Just as the high priest places the sins of the community on the head of this goat and sends it off
into the wilderness, so too the ritual of Tashlich symbolically casts a person’s sins away to be
carried off by the current.

But according to today’s daf, the goat is not the only element of the Yom Kippur service that has
the power to affect atonement. Two days ago, we discovered a surprising statement that the death
of a righteous person can also affect atonement. And today, the rabbis wonder about the incense
that the high priest offers in the sacred privacy of the Holy of Holies:

5
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/yoma-44/

12
Does incense affect atonement?
Yes, as Rabbi Hananya teaches: We learned of the incense that it affects atonement, as it is
stated: And he put on the incense and made atonement for the people (Numbers 17:12).

And the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: For what does incense affect atonement? For slander.
Let something that is done in secret come and affect atonement for an act done in secret.

According to the Talmud, on Yom Kippur atonement is not just the province of bulls and goats!
The fragrant incense, offered by the high priest alone in the Holy of Holies, can also atone for sins.
However, the school of Rabbi Ishmael explains that it atones for just one type of sin: lashon hara,
typically translated as “evil speech” or “slander.” Why? Just as the incense is offered behind closed
doors, so too is vicious talk.

Lashon hara is one of those intangible kinds of sins — so easy to do, and seemingly without
consequence. It strikes me that like incense, lashon hara has a way of rapidly dispersing through
the air, seeping under the cracks of doors and penetrating dark spaces, causing a stink (albeit a
stink that people love!) everywhere it goes. Once uttered, like smoke its spread is virtually
uncontrollable. Maybe we need a special part of the Yom Kippur service to atone just for this
particularly slippery and insidious misdeed. So now alongside that cornbread you toss for making
terrible jokes, or the stuffing you cast out for the sin of gluttony, you can recall that the high priest
burned incense to atone for every time someone said something vicious about that pain-in-the-
neck neighbor that just wasn’t true — or at least, not very nice.

Tzeniut as a Factor in Spirituality, Avodah, and National Kapparah

Rabbi Michael Rosensweig writes:6

In its delineation of the avodat Yom Hakippurim, the Torah (Vayikra 16:17) imparts "vekol
adam lo yihiyeh be-ohel moed bevo'o le-kaper ba-kodesh ad tzeito" - that while the
kohen gadol served in the Kodesh Kodashim during the blood sprinkling of
the par and sair sacrifices (16:14-15) and while the ketoret was being consumed (16:12-13),
no one was permitted even in the adjacent venue of the heichal.

Our Daf (Yoma 44a) extends this principle. Thus, when avodah (the daily ketoret, the blood
offerings-matanot of the Yom Kippur korbonot or of the par he'elem davar etc.) took place
in the heichal, the adjacent area between the ulam and mizbeach also had to be evacuated. It
is intriguing that the verse conveying this puzzling restriction concludes by referring to the

6
https://www.torahweb.org/torah/2021/parsha/rros_achareimos.html

13
 expansive atonement accomplished by these most private avodot of Yom Kippur - "vekiper
ba'ado u'be'ad beito u'be'ad kol Kehal Yisrael." 7

What is the significance of this extraordinary privacy requirement and how is it connected to
the broad impact of the avodah. Indeed, the Gemara (Yoma 44a) notes that the source verse
does not explicitly mention the ketoret, but that the conclusion that refers to the atonement of
the entire Klal Yisrael implies it -"eizeh kaparah sheshaveh lo ule'ehav hakohanim ve-kol
Kehal Yisrael hevi omer zu haketoret." While some (Chizkuni 16:17) perceives this demand
to be a purely technical precaution to avoid the risk of ritual impurity that might not have been
subject to the atonement of Yom Kippur, this perspective does not satisfactorily explain the
wider application to the avodah in the heichal or the connection to comprehensive atonement.

Rav Hirsch understood this requirement to further cordon off the avodot of the innermost
precincts not as a manifestation of elitism or a demand for greater privacy, but actually as an
expression of the added relevance and impact of these locations to the rest of
the mikdash structure and to the everyday life of Klal Yisrael. In his view, the adjacent venues
were inherently linked with and therefore experienced the overflow impact of whatever
occurred in the private precincts, and, consequently also needed to be cleared of those who
were not directly implementing the avodah. The purpose was not to further isolate or seclude
the inner precincts or the elite avodah they hosted, but to acknowledge the fluidity-
interconnection of all parts of the mikdash, which technically mandated a wider berth. It is
inconceivable, in his view, that distancing the rest of the population was the purpose or goal
of this imperative, as all dimensions of the avodah, even the most private, enhance all of the
nation and connect to its daily mission in and out of the mikdash. The link between
comprehensive atonement and the special role of the ketoret is consistent with this position.

We may posit another perspective to complement Rav Hirsch's approach. Netziv (Ha'amek
Davar 16:17) links Chazal's view of the role of ketoret in neutralizing the pervasive
transgression of gossip (lashon hara), the ultimate breach of privacy-tzeniut, with the special
demand for a further layer of privacy.

This idea is supported by the Gemara (Zevachim 88b), "ketoret mekaperet al lashon hara -
yavo davar shebechashai ve-yekaper al ma'aseh chashai".

Rashi (Zevachim 88b, Arachin 16a) specifically refers to the perishah requirement in this
context.

A close analysis of the Gemarot in Yoma and the Rambam's rulings (Hilchot Temidim 3:3,9)
establish that while there are other applications of this additional distancing condition, as
noted, the primary focus of this special requirement is the ketoret. [See a summary of some
of the evidence in Gevurat Yitzchak, ad loc, especially his citation of the Griz, and his analysis
of the differences between ketoret and hazaot ha-dam.]

7
This is the most sweeping and inclusive expression of collective forgiveness in the avodah. See 16:6,11- "vekiper ba'ado
u'be'ad beito", 16:24-"vekiper ba'ado u'be'ad ha'am", 16:33-"ve-al hakohanim ve-al kol am hakahal vekiper"

14
Rambam codifies this demand specifically in Hilchot Temidim (not in Hilchot Bait Mikdash),
in the framework of his treatment of ketoret (and Chinuch, likewise - no. 103). In that context,
he expands to other applications, but in a manner that also accents subtle differences between
the primary and secondary applications.

The evidence demonstrates that the need for extra privacy, isolation during
the ketoret offering is an internal factor and even part of the essential character and definition
of this special avodah. Some posit that for this reason, the demand does not constitute and
independent mitzvah, as it primarily constitutes a dimension of ketoret itself.
Some mefarshim (Rinat Yitchak op cit) speculate that ignoring the adjacent evacuation
requirement may even invalidate the ketoret!

The ketoret is perceived as an acutely spiritual form of avodah. The fact that it accentuates
the more amorphous, ephemeral sense of smell is consistent with this status. It is hardly a
coincidence that great religious crises that also test the boundaries of and relationship to
material and spiritual Divine worship revolved around ketoret. Korah's insincere, cynical
quest (machloket shelo lesheim shamayim - Avot) to vulgarize Jewish spiritual leadership,
even the sacrificial order, anchored in the apparently noble but actually diluting value of "kol
ha-edah kulam kedoshim", was decidedly defeated by ketoret. The tragic, sincere but
misguided ketoret zarah offered by Nadav and Avihu is perceived by many views in Chazal
as an effort to hyper-spiritualize avodat Hashem. Avodat Yom Kippur itself is introduced
against the background of that tragic misconception - "achrei mot shenei benei Aharon be-
karvatam lifnei Hashem va-yamutu" - as a corrective that both rejected and incorporated
elements of that hyper spiritualization. Thus, "bezot yavo Aharon el ha-kodesh" charts a
Divinely guided balanced, multifaceted process presided over by Aharon ha-Kohen and those
who will succeed him (16:3, 33). The centerpiece consists of an especially finely ground
(dakah min ha-dakah) ketoret that accounts for two trips into the kodesh ha-kodoshim! The
extensive protocols, including the oscillation between inner and outer precincts of
the mikdash, and all that implies, protect and enable "ki be-anan eiraeh al ha-kapporet"!

It is unsurprising that this ultimate attainment, produced in the highly calibrated framework
of five tevilot and ten kidushim, embodying dizzying wardrobe changes signifying the
interaction of avodat penim and avodat chutz, engenders a need for excessive tzeniut -
seclusion, that it constitutes an important dimension of this singular ketoret itself.
Daily ketoret, also subject to this demand for isolation and exclusive presence, mandated and
defined its own mizbeah, mizbeach ha-ketoret inside the heichal.

The dialectic between tzeniut- privacy-seclusion and a public posture and comprehensive
impact is a singular feature of halachic life. Both methodologies are indispensable, and they
need to be complementary to achieve complex, halachically aspirational goals. Chazal note
that the first luchot were revealed in the presence of all of Klal Yisrael accompanied by
thunder and lightning (kolot u-verakim), but the luchot that ultimately survived were the one's
presented to Moshe in seclusion, embodying the quality of tzeniut.

Our primary vehicle for prayer is the silent, highly personal, even intimate Amidah, although
it is also followed by chazarat ha-shatz, a manifestation of tefillat ha-tzibur. The fact that

15
 the hazaot ha-dam and especially the ultra-refined Yom Kippur ketoret demand excessive
seclusion and privacy notwithstanding and in conjunction with the public spectacle
of avodat Yom Kippur is consistent with this broader phenomenon.

Indeed, the selective appropriate manifestations of tzeniut and acute spirituality, exemplified
by ketoret, ultimately facilitate comprehensive kapparah for each and all segments of Klal
Yisrael - "vechiper baado ube'ad beito u-be'ad kol Kehal Yisrael."

Rav Dr. Yonatan Feintuch writes:8

Sukkot follows almost immediately after Yom Kippur and both share in the atmosphere of Tishrei
– one of soul-searching, gazing at the year gone by, atonement, and looking towards the
future. Still, as we know, these festivals are very different in essence, mood, and in the laws that
characterize them. In this article I suggest that the two holidays sit at opposite poles of single
continuum: one that stretches from inwardness to outwardness. This continuum has its source in
the Torah, and it is developed further in the Oral Law.9

Yom Kippur – a day of “inner service”

The service performed by the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur, as set forth in Sefer Vayikra (chapter
16), takes place in the innermost part of the Mishkan. The chapter is introduced with the
preparations that Aharon must undertake before entering the Holy of Holies, inside the curtain (vv.
2-4). The sacrifices offered on this day are an ox and a he-goat; they are prepared inside and their
blood is sprinkled on the curtain (vv.14-15). One of the central services of the day is the offering
of the incense: it usually takes place upon the inner altar,[1] but on Yom Kippur it is drawn even
further “inward,” into the Holy of Holies itself (12-13). Atonement for the Sanctuary itself (16) is
one of the main objectives of the Yom Kippur service.

There is one verse whose meaning is unclear:

8
https://www.etzion.org.il/en/holidays/sukkot/inside-outside-yom-kippur-and-sukkot
9
Translated by Kaeren Fish

16
“And he shall go out to the altar that is before God, and make atonement for it…” (v. 18)

Which altar is referred to here? On the one hand, if we read this in conjunction with the previous
verse, it would seem to refer to the outer altar, where the burnt offerings are sacrificed. The text
reads, “And there shall be no man in the Tent of Meeting when he goes in to make atonement in
the holy place, until he comes out… And he shall go out to the altar that is before God…” (vv. 17-
18). Likewise, two verses later we read, “And when he has made an end of atoning for the holy
place, and the Tent of Meeting, and the altar…” (v. 20). All this would suggest that the altar in
question is the outer one. On the other hand, the verse describes the altar as being “before God” –
an expression which is used elsewhere with reference to the golden inner altar. The description
in parashat Tetzaveh (Shemot 30:10) likewise suggests that the golden altar is being referred to.[2]
While the verses leave some room for doubt, Chazal are quite unequivocal in their view. It is the
golden inner altar, says the Sifra, that the verse refers to:
“Perhaps the verse refers to the outer altar? (It does not,) as the verse states explicitly, ‘which is
before God.’ Thus, the reference is to the inner altar.”[3]

The halakha is accordingly set down in Mishna Yoma (5:5).

Prof. David Henschke notes the distinction in this regard between the practice in the Mishkan and
that in the Temple.[4] In the Mishkan, atonement was attained on the outer altar on Yom Kippur,
while in the Temple, in later generations, the atonement could only be attained – according
to Chazal’s interpretation of the verses – in the inner parts of the Temple. Henschke explains this
by pointing out that in the Temple (in contrast to the Mishkan), “the Sanctuary and the [outer] altar
are separate domains… In the Temple, the altar is separate from the Temple; it is an entity in its
own right, belonging to Israel.”[5] He quotes a verse from Divrei Ha-yamim I: “… This is the
house of the Lord God, and this is the altar of the burnt offering for Israel” (22:1).

Indeed, on Yom Kippur, Israel (represented by the Kohen Gadol) enters the House of the King and
His inner rooms.

Sukkot – the festival of the outer altar[6]

In contrast, the Sukkot sacrificial service is located on the outer altar, the altar that “belongs to
Israel.” The focus has moved outside.

Once again, our starting point is the Chumash. In parashat Pinchas (Bamidbar 28-29), where the
details of the daily sacrifice and the additional sacrifices are set down, by far the longest section is
devoted to Sukkot. Why? On each of the seven days of the festival a different number of sacrifices
is offered, and therefore each day's service must be detailed separately. In addition, the overall
number of sacrifices offered over the course of the festival – seventy bullocks (in contrast to the
one or two offered on other festivals, and a total of fourteen over the whole of the Festival
of Matzot) and fourteen lambs on each day (in contrast to the seven offered on any other festive
day) – is conspicuous in and of itself.[7]

17
Various explanations have been offered for the changing number of Sukkot sacrifices; but even
the simplest reading of the verses shows an intensive level of activity focused around the outer
altar. The emphasis has moved from the inner altar and the inner sections of the Temple, which
dominate the Yom Kippur service, to the outer altar, which is the focus on Sukkot.

Furthermore, Bamidbar 29, which describes the festive sacrifices, neglects to mention any Sukkot
commandments or characteristics other than the multitude of additional sacrifices, all introduced
with the rather bland heading, “You shall celebrate a feast unto God, seven days.” Contrast this to
the other festivals, where a central commandment that characterizes that day is mentioned, apart
from the additional sacrifice: the eating of matzot, the meal offering of the bikkurim (first fruits),
the day of sounding the shofar, or the affliction of the soul.

But where are the four species of Sukkot? Their glaring omission emphasizes that the character of
Sukkot – at least depicted in this parasha –focuses on its sacrificial service. (In parashat Emor,
too, the four species are mentioned only as a sort of “appendix” to the section on the festivals,
appearing only after the summing up of the parasha. Contrast this to the other festivals, which are
characterized by a specific festival commandment in addition to their sacrifices.)

Along with the above-mentioned unit in Bamidbar, another biblical unit worth mentioning in this
regard is the inauguration of the Temple by King Shlomo (Melakhim I 8). Shlomo gathers the
nation on Sukkot (2:65) An enormous quantity of sacrifices is offered on this occasion on the outer
altar. In fact, the quantity is so great (vv. 62-63) that Shlomo extends the sanctity of the Temple
outwards, to include the courtyard (ibid., 64). Admittedly, these sacrifices are not brought in honor
of the festival, nor do they necessarily arise from its sanctity. Nevertheless, it would seem that the
choice of timing – the festival of Sukkot, and the doubling of the duration of the festival for that
occasion (ibid. 65) – are not coincidental.[8]

In the Oral Law we encounter further manifestations of Sukkot as the “festival of the outer altar.”
The two last chapters of Massekhet Sukka, dealing with the Temple on Sukkot, do not discuss the
sacrificial service; they focus on other activities in the Temple on this festival. Much of the
discussion is devoted to the four species, and especially the lulav and arava. Other commandments
described in detail include the ceremonial pouring of the water and the Simchat Beit Ha-shoeva.
In these, descriptions the outer altar plays a central role. In the Mishna describing the
commandment of the arava, we read:

“They would collect from there young willow branches, and place them upright at the sides of the
altar, with their tops bent over the altar… On each day they would encompass the altar once…
and on that day they would encompass the altar seven times.” (Sukka 4:5)
The entire ceremony centers around the altar – in both senses. The same Mishna also includes a
sort of ceremonial addressing of the altar:
“When leaving, they would say: ‘Beauty to you, O altar; beauty to you, O altar.’ Rabbi Eliezer
teaches: ‘To God and to you, O altar; to God and to you, O altar.’”

The teaching of Rabbi Eliezer, according to which God and the altar are addressed together in the
same breath, raises a question in the Gemara, which explains:

18
“Does one not thereby associate God’s Name with something else?... What it means is, ‘To God’
we give thanks and ‘to you’ (the altar) we express praise; ‘to God’ we give thanks and ‘to you’
(the altar) we express admiration.” (Sukka 45b)

Still, even with this clarification, the altar remains a focus of attention. This is true both under
positive circumstances, when Am Yisrael observe the Sukkot commandments, and – le-havdil –
under negative circumstances, when Am Yisrael sins. It is no coincidence that the last chapter
of Massekhet Sukka cites the story of Miriam, daughter of Bilga, who rejected her Jewish heritage
and married a Greek officer.[9] When the Greeks entered the Sanctuary, she made the altar the
focus of her blasphemy:

“Our Sages taught: There was a certain Miriam, daughter of Bilga, who rejected her heritage and
married an officer of the Greek kings. When the Greeks entered the Sanctuary, she stamped with
her sandal on the altar, saying, ‘Wolf, wolf! For how long will you consume Israel’s money, while
failing to stand by them in their time of distress!’” (Sukka 56b)

In the commandment of the ceremonial pouring of the water, too, as described further on in the
chapter, the altar is at the center. In another commandment, set forth at length in the fifth chapter
of the Mishna as well as in the Gemara – the Simchat Beit Ha-shoeva – the same idea of moving
outward recurs: “In the night ending the first day of the festival, they would go down to the Ezrat
Nashim…” – and Rashi explains that the reference is to the kohanim and leviim, who would
descend the steps from the Ezrat Yisrael. In other words, in terms of the layout of the Temple, the
movement is one going outwards.

So central is the role of the altar over Sukkot that there are statements in Massekhet Sukka that
connect even the other commandments of the festival, which are observed throughout the country,
with the sacrificial service in the Temple:

“Rabbi Abahu said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: Whoever takes up the lulav with its binding and
the hadas with its wreathing is considered as though he had built an altar and offered sacrifices
upon it, as it is written, ‘Bind the festival with myrtle branches, up to the horns of the
altar’ (Tehillim 118:27). Rabbi Yirmiya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, and Rabbi
Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon of Machoz who had received it from Rabbi Yochanan
of Makkut: Whoever makes a binding for the festival through eating and drinking, is considered
as though he had built an altar and offered sacrifices upon it, as it is written, ‘Bind the festival
with myrtle branches, up to the horns of the altar.’” (Sukka 45a-b)

What the above suggests is that, in the Temple, Yom Kippur entails a move inward, into the
Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies. And only one representative of the Jewish People – the Kohen
Gadol – enters into that holy place, for a holy and intimate encounter with the Shechina, in the
innermost space. On Sukkot, in contrast, there is a spreading of holiness outwards.
The Shechina and its holiness move outward, as it were, to the courtyard, the location of the outer
altar. There they “encounter” the nation, and there is a celebration of the Divine Presence that takes
place outside, with a ceremony of multiple elements around the altar. The focus on the outer altar
does not represent worship of the altar itself as an independent entity, as the Gemara emphasizes.
Rather it highlights the contrast with Yom Kippur: the fact that the encounter with

19
the Shechina takes place on this festival not in the innermost chambers of the King, but rather
outside. The Shechina “goes out,” as it were, to Am Yisrael, who have come up to her in
pilgrimage, and they meet.

This is a new perspective in which these two festivals represent two parts of a single, all-
encompassing process. The two festivals are complementary, each expressing one end of the
continuum.[10] The calendrical juxtaposition of these two festivals creates a whole picture with
two contrasting elements: one, where Am Yisrael (via their representative) enter to meet God, in
an atmosphere of holiness and intimacy, and the other, where the Shechina comes out, as it were,
to meet Am Yisrael, thereby creating a mass encounter of joy.

Parallels between Yoma and Sukka

A comparison of the mishnayos, beraitot and Talmudic discussions concerning these two holidays
shows a number of unexpected parallels between them, both of language and content. This is
unsurprising, considering the contrasting and complementary aspects of the two holidays discussed
above. Not all parallels will be treated here,[11] but I shall cite two examples.

1. Concerning Yom Kippur, the Torah states: “And there shall be no man in the Tent of
Meeting when he goes in to make atonement in the holy place, until he comes
out” (Vayikra 16:17). This law emphasizes the intimate aspect of the encounter between
the representative of Am Yisrael and the Shechina on this day. In Yoma we learn that this
law also applies to the area between the Ulam (the hall leading to the Kodesh, or outer room
of the Temple) and the altar. The Amoraim discuss the specifics of this rule and how strictly
it applies (Yoma 44a-b). In any event, even if this prohibition is merely a desirable
stringency, or a “fence” established by Chazal in order to prevent anyone entering any
further inward, the law expresses intimacy and inwardness. In Sukka, by contrast, we find
an opposite law, unique to Sukkot, whereby entry into this area is permitted beyond what
is allowed in the rest of the year: “Reish Lakish said: Kohanim who are physically
blemished may enter between the Ulam and the altar in order to fulfill their obligation
concerning the arava” (Sukka 44a).[12] Thus we find that this “in-between” area is
considered part of the inner area of the Temple on Yom Kippur, when, at certain times,
only the Kohen Gadol may be present. However, during Sukkot the same area is
considered part of the outside area of the Temple, another example of the trend of
expansion and reaching out towards the rest of the nation.[13]

2. The Yerushalmi (Sukka chapter 2, 53a) cites the opinion of R. Eliezer, who derives the
laws of sitting in the Sukka during the seven days of the festival from the seven days of
consecration of the Mishkan. As we know, the seven days of separation observed by
the Kohen Gadol prior to Yom Kippur are likewise derived from those inaugural days
(beginning of Yoma in both the Yerushalmi and the Bavli).

Yet although both Yom Kippur and Sukkot derive laws from the seven inaugural days of
the Mishkan, Rabbi Yoel bin-Nun[14] points out an important contrast between Yom Kippur and
the seven days of consecration. On Yom Kippur, as mentioned, the service is inward-directed. On

20
the eighth day of the consecration of the Mishkan, in contrast, there was no “internal” service.
Even the blood of the sin-offering offered by Aharon was not brought inside.[15]

Thus, Rabbi bin-Nun describes the eighth day as the day of the appearance of the Shechina over
the entire Mishkan. The Shechina appears in fire atop the outer altar, in contrast to the usual
situation in which the fire is brought by man. The appearance of the fire atop the outer altar was a
revelation before the entire nation, and therefore took place outside. Rabbi bin-Nun describes Yom
Kippur as a deliberate contrast to that original eighth day, an attempt to solve the problem, as it
were, that resulted from the tragedy of that day (the deaths of Aharon’s two sons; see Vayikra 10).
It became evident that the revelation of the Divine Presence in fire or in incense to the entire people
could not be properly contained, and could have disastrous consequences. The solution, then, was
Yom Kippur, when the Shechina remained concealed in its “inner chambers,” and just one
representative of the nation would enter, under strict and limited conditions, to atone for the people
and to represent them in the encounter with the Shechina.

In light of the above, we now have a better understanding of the equation between Sukkot and the
days of consecration. In fact, this equation now seems quite natural, since at both times the essence
of the Divine service is “outside,” in contrast to Yom Kippur. However, on Sukkot there is no real
“Divine revelation,” as there was during the days of consecration, owing – as noted – to the
difficulty and danger entailed by such a revelation in a mass gathering. However, after the
experience of Yom Kippur, when the nation remains “behind the scenes,” far from
the Shechina itself, concealed in the inner chambers, then there is room for the other extreme: the
participation of the entire nation, if not in an actual encounter with the Shechina, then at least in
proximity to it. The entire nation celebrates and rejoices “before God,” as during the days of
consecration, and this mass festivity is conducted outside, so that the entire nation can indeed
participate. While the Shechina may not be revealed in a tangible way, its presence is represented
by the regular fire – which consumes the many sacrifices brought by the people – upon the outer
altar.

The spreading of the Shechina on Sukkot – even outside of the Temple

So far we have focused on the festive Temple service. But Sukkot also has other aspects that are
given extensive attention in Massekhet Sukka (occupying the first three chapters): the
commandment of the sukka and of the four species.

Rabbi Dr. Yakov Nagen[16] argues that the sukka and the other commandments of the
festival[17] are an expression of the spread of the Shechina during Sukkot even beyond the outer
Temple precincts, all the way – as it were – to the home (or sukka) of every individual in Israel.
Much of his discussion is devoted to establishing the connection between the sukka and the
Temple. I shall not repeat the excellent discussion here, but rather cite just part of his conclusion,
in the section entitled, “Sukka – the spread of the Shechina from the Temple to the home”:

“On Sukkot, the Shechina comes to us, to our dwelling… After Yom Kippur, when
the Kohen enters the Holy of Holies, God ‘repays’ us, and comes down to our sukkot, so as to
enrich our lives with His Presence.”[18]

21
In my view, the above discussion concerning the outer altar representing the spread of God’s
presence complements R. Nagen’s idea about the sukka representing God’s presence.[19]

The Chuppa and the days of celebration

Perhaps we might describe the process set forth above, starting on Yom Kippur and reaching its
completion on Sukkot, in a different way, using the concepts of the well-known metaphor of the
“marriage” between Am Yisrael and God. Yom Kippur represents the intimate encounter in which
the groom brings the bride into his home. Sukkot, in contrast, parallels their emergence for the
seven days of celebration. Thus, these two festivals represent, each year anew, the renewal of the
bond of marriage between God and Am Yisrael.

In this context it is appropriate to cite, in a homiletical manner, the well-known verse: “On the day
of his marriage and on the day of the rejoicing of his heart” (Shir Ha-shirim 3:11). The two parts
of this verse are interpreted in different midrashim as expressing two different stages in God’s
relationship with Israel. While there is no tannaitic source that explains “on the day of his wedding”
as a reference to Yom Kippur and “on the day of the rejoicing of his heart” as a reference to Sukkot,
there is a midrash tannaim that comes close to the idea expressed above:

“‘On the day of his wedding’ – on the day that the Shechina rested on the Temple; ‘and on the day
of the rejoicing of his heart’ – on the day that a new fire descended from on High and devoured
the burnt offering and the fats upon the altar.’”[20]

The division presented in the Sifra expresses a similar idea, since “the day of his wedding” speaks
of the Shechina resting upon, or entering, the Temple. “On the day of the rejoicing of his heart” is
a more public occasion of the revelation of the Shechina outside the Sanctuary, through the descent
of fire from heaven onto the outer altar.10

[1] Note that there were two altars in the Mishkan and later in the Temple: the inner (golden) altar, which was located in the
Sanctuary itself and upon which incense was offered, and the outer (copper) altar, which was outside the Sanctuary and upon which
animal sacrifices were offered.
[2] This question has been the subject of much discussion; see, for example, D. Henschke, “Le-Seder ha-Avoda be-Yom ha-
Kippurim,” Megadim 33, 5761, pp. 34-35, and the sources listed in his notes. My intention here is merely to emphasize the
unequivocal position of Chazal on this question.
[3] Torat Kohanim, Acharei Mot 4:8, Weiss edition 81d.
[4] Above, n. 2, pp. 37-39.
[5] Ibid., pp. 38-39.
[6] Rav Dr. Yakov Nagen (Genack) sets forth in his book Mayim, Beria ve-Hitgalut: Chag ha-Sukkot be-Machshevet ha-
Halakha (Maggid, 2013) the idea of the dissemination of the Shechina and of holiness during Sukkot throughout Eretz Yisrael; we
will cite him below.
[7] The doubled quantity of lambs was addressed many years ago by Rabbi Yoel bin-Nun in his shiurim. He explained that the
festival of Sukkot belongs simultaneously to two sets of festivals that appear in this parasha: the three pilgrim festivals, on the one
hand, and the festivals of the month of Tishrei, on the other. Therefore, the number of lambs is doubled. However, this explanation
fails to resolve the question of the number of bullocks. Chazal explain (Sukka 55b) that the seventy bullocks correspond to the
seventy nations. We can propose an explanation on the level of peshat, based on Rabbi Yoel bin-Nun’s explanation for the lambs:
On the festivals of the month of Tishrei, one bullock is brought each day; on the pilgrim festivals, two are brought each day. The
festival of Sukkot, falling as it does under both categories, requires three bullocks each day as a basis. If we deduct three bullocks
per day from the total of seventy, we are left with 49 – seven times seven – a highly symbolic number that is especially pertinent
within the context of the festivals. For some reason (and many might be proposed), the Torah stipulates that the number of bullocks

10
The Hebrew version of this article appeared in U-veChag Ha-Sukkot, ed. Amnon Bazak [Alon Shevut: Tvunot, 2012]

22
is reduced day by day over the course of the festival (perhaps because it molds this Festival of Joy as starting out at a certain
climactic point which then naturally subsides as the days progress). Therefore, instead of commanding that seven bullocks be
offered on each of the seven days, the Torah creates a different structure which starts with ten (over and above the basic three) and
goes down to four – which is the only way of dividing 49 in a structure that decreases by one per day.
[8] The consecration of the altar in the Second Temple likewise took place during Sukkot (Ezra 3:3-4). It should be pointed out
that according to Chazal (Shabbat 30a; Mo’ed Katan 9a) the first seven days were celebrated by Shlomo as the inauguration of the
Temple prior to Sukkot, and the next seven days were celebrated as the festival, with no connection to the inauguration of the
Temple. However, a reading of the plain text suggests that the two celebrations overlapped.
[9] See Tosefta Sukka 4:28, Lieberman edition p. 278.
[10] This is a different perspective on the holidays of Tishrei, which are typically divided with Rosh ha-Shana and Yom Kippur on
the one hand, and Sukkot on the other. My intention is not to reject that perception but rather to enrich it by highlighting other
elements.
[11] Some further parallels that are not treated above:
a. The formula “[For] all seven days a person makes his sukka a permanent [dwelling] and his house [a] temporary one”
concerning the festival of Sukkot (Mishna Sukka 2:9) recalls the formula that appears several times in the first chapter
of Yoma, concerning the seven days of separation observed by the Kohen Gadol; see also below in the body of the text,
in example 2.
b. The Mishna in Sukka (2:8) describes how strict Shammai the Elder was about everyone dwelling in the sukka, even very
young children, to the extent that he placed even the infant born to his daughter-in-law in the sukka. A similar story about
Shammai the Elder and children appears in one other place: “It happened that Shammai the Elder did not wish to feed
his son…” (Tosefta Kippurim 4:2, Lieberman edition, p. 249).
[12] See Rashi ad loc.
[13] As some of the Rishonim understand it, even Israelites would encompass the altar and were permitted to enter this “in-
between” area. See Y. Nagen, Mayim, Beria ve-Hitgalut, p. 99.
[14] “Ha-Yom ha-Shemini ve-Yom ha-Kippurim,” Megadim 8, 5749, pp. 9-34.
[15] Indeed, even the incense – as Rabbi bin-Nun notes – which is usually offered with fire that is brought inside, was not supposed
to be brought in on the eighth day; this was precisely the sin of Aharon’s sons.
[16] See n. 6 above. Many of the connections and parallels between Yom Kippur and Sukkot that I have mentioned appear in R.
Nagen’s discussion too.
[17] R. Nagen addresses the aggadic statements cited above, comparing the four species to a sacrifice, in a slightly different way
from the approach adopted here. He develops the idea of the four species as a sacrifice, as part of a perception of the spread of
the Shechina throughout Eretz Yisrael, which facilitates this sort of “sacrifice” throughout the country and not only in the Temple.
See Mayim, Beria ve-Hitgalut, pp. 96-101.
[18] Pp. 65-67.
[19] Following R. Nagen, we might add further contrasts between the two holidays in terms of their laws:
a. The Gemara (Yoma 10a) distinguishes between the inner chamber to which the Kohen Gadol retires in anticipation of
Yom Kippur, and the sukka, to which all of Israel emerge outward, on Sukkot.
b. Another possible parallel is between the prohibition of eating on Yom Kippur and the commandment to eat on
Sukkot (Sukka 2:6). Admittedly, this eating is part of the commandment to dwell in the sukka; however, there are opinions
among the Rishonim and Acharonim maintaining that, at least according to the opinion of R. Eliezer, there is an
independent commandment to eat on Sukkot. (For the different opinions see D. Henschke, “Ematai Yoshvim ba-Sukka?
Le-Shichzura shel Mishna Rishona,” in D. Boyarin et al. [eds.], Atara le-Chaim, Mechkarim be-Sifrut ha-Talmudit ve-
ha-Rabbanit Likhvod Professor Chaim Zalman Dimitrovsky, Jerusalem 5760, p. 88 and notes ad loc. See also Henschke’s
arguments against these approaches. On the other hand, see the aggada connected to the statement cited above: “Whoever
makes a binding for the festival through eating and drinking, is considered as though he had built an altar and offered
sacrifices upon it.” We also recall a similar statement made in Yoma (81b, with parallels in other massekhtot): “Whoever
eats and drinks on the ninth [of Tishrei – the day before Yom Kippur] is considered as though he fasted on the ninth and
the tenth.”)
[20] Torat Kohanim Shemini parasha 1, 16, Weiss edition 44c.

23
 Gold!

Jeremy Brown writes:11

Yoma 44
‫ ב‬,‫יומא מד‬

,‫ ְוָזָהב ָסגוּר‬,‫שׁחוּט‬ ָ ‫ ְוָזָהב‬,‫ ְוָזָהב מוָּפז‬,‫ וְּזַהב אוִֹפיר‬,‫ ְוָזָהב טוֹב‬,‫ ָזָהב‬:‫ ִשְׁבָﬠה ְזָהִבים ֵהן‬:‫ָאַמר ַרב ִחְסָדּא‬
‫וְּזַהב ַפּ ְרַו ִים‬. ‫שׁ ִנְּפָתּח ָכּל ַהֲחנוּיוֹת‬ֶ ‫שָׁﬠה‬ ָ ‫ ָזָהב ָסגוּר — ְבּ‬.‫שׁ ִנְּטֶוה ְכּחוּט‬ ֶ — ‫שׁ ח וּט‬ ָ ‫ ָזָהב‬.‫שׁדּוֶֹמה ְלָפז‬ֶ
‫ ְזַהב‬.‫ ״וְּזַהב ָהָא ֶרץ ַהִהוא טוֹב״‬:‫ ִדְּכִתיב‬,‫ ָזָהב ְוָזָהב טוֹב‬.‫שׁדּוֶֹמה ְלַדם ַהָפּ ִרים‬ ֶ — ‫ ְזַהב ַפּ ְרַו ִים‬.‫ִנְסָגּרוֹת‬
‫ ָזָהב מוָּפז‬.‫— אוִֹפיר — ְדָּאֵתי ֵמאוִֹפיר‬

Rav Chisda said: There are seven types of gold mentioned in the Bible: Gold, and
good gold, and gold of Ophir (I Kings 10:11), and glistering gold (I Kings 10:18), and
shaḥut gold (I Kings 10:17), and closed gold (I Kings 10:21), and parvayim gold (II
Chronicles 3:6). The Gemara explains the reason for these names: There is a
distinction between gold and good gold, as it is written in the verse: “And the gold of
that land is good” (Genesis 2:12), which indicates the existence of gold of a higher
quality. Gold of Ophir is gold that comes from Ophir. Glistering [mufaz] gold is so

11
http://www.talmudology.com/jeremybrownmdgmailcom/2021/5/23/yoma-44b-gold

24
named because it resembles the luster of pearls [paz] in the way it glistens. Shaḥut
gold is named as such because it is very malleable and is spun like thread [shenitve
keḥut]. Shaḥut is a contraction of the words shenitve keḥut. Closed gold is so called
because when a shop opens to sell it, all the other shops close, as no one is interested
in purchasing any other type of gold. Parvayim gold is so called because its redness
resembles the blood of bulls [parim].

‫ ְבּכל יוֹם ָהָיה ְזָהָבהּ‬:‫ ַתּ ְנָיא ָנֵמי ָהִכי‬.‫ ְוכל ַחד ְוַחד ִאית ֵבּיהּ ָזָהב ְוָזָהב טוֹב‬,‫שּׁה ֵהן‬ ָ ‫ ֲחִמ‬:‫שׁי ָאַמר‬
ֵ ‫ַרב ָא‬
‫שׁדּוֶֹמה ְלַדם ַהָפּ ִרים‬ֶ ‫ ְוַהיּוֹם ָאדוֹם — ְוַה ְיינוּ ְזַהב ַפּ ְרַו ִים‬,‫ָירוֹק‬

Rav Ashi said: There are in fact only five types of gold, the last five in Rav Ḥisda’s list. Gold
and good gold are not independent categories; rather, each and every one of the types of gold
has two varieties: Regular gold and a superior variety called good gold. That was also taught in
a baraita with regard to parvayim gold: On every other day the coal pan was made of greenish
gold, but on this day it was made of a red gold, and this is the parvayim gold which resembles
the blood of bulls.

NOT ALL GOLD IS “GOLD”

We usually think of gold as being the color of, well, gold, but that’s not its only color. While pure
gold is a sort of reddish yellow, gold alloys vary in color depending on the proportion of the other
metals that are found in it. (An alloy is a mixture of two or more different metal elements.) So an
alloy of gold and copper will be more red, while an alloy of gold and silver (or gold and other
metals like nickel or palladium) will give a white looking gold. You can see how this works in the
figure below:
In addition, the purity of gold is measured in karats (also spelled cartats, but certainly not carrots),
where each karat is 1/24 (or 4.1667%) part of pure gold. Sixteen karat gold means that it is an alloy
in which 16 parts are gold and 8 parts are another metal is 16-karat gold. Pure gold is, by definition,
free of other metals and is therefore 24-karat (ie 24 parts out of 24) gold.

WHERE DOES “PARVAYIM GOLD” COME FROM?

Recent evidence suggests that gold is formed by the massive collision of neutron stars. “Every
element on the periodic table heavier than bismuth…is forged by the rapid-process in these most
extreme stellar surfaces” wrote the cosmochemist Tim Gregory in his recent book Meteorite
(p.168). “This includes some of your most highly prized substances like …silver, platinum and
gold.” This gold was incorporated into the earth’s mantle when the planet was being formed, and
was incorporated with other metals, which is why different kinds of gold alloys may be extracted
from different mines.

25
It is this feature that Rav Chisda and Rav Ashi were highlighting in today’s page of Talmud.
Shauhut gold (‫ )ָזָהב ָשׁחוּט‬which Rav Chisda noted to be so malleable that it could be spun like a
thread (‫ ) ִנְּטֶוה ְכּחוּט‬was likely almost pure gold (that is 24 carat). Today, gold can be made into a
thin sheet known as gold leaf that is an astonishing four to five millionths of an inch in thickness
(0.1 to 0.125 millionths of a meter or micrometers, µm). And the “spinning into a thread” that Rav
Chisda mentioned? Today it is possible to spin gold into a thread that is just one atom thick. One
atom. Think about that.

Another kind of gold mentioned by Rav Chisda is Parvayim gold which was a red color that
“resembled the blood of bulls” (‫)ֶשׁדּוֶֹמה ְלַדם ַהָפּ ִרים‬. This gold was likely an alloy with a high content
of copper, (found towards the bottom right of the triangle above).

THE MEDICINAL QUALITIES OF GOLD

The Jewish physician Abraham Portaleone was born in Mantua in 1541, and is best known for his
work Shilte Hagibborim [Shields of the Mighty], in which he sought to identify the precise
ingredients of the Temple incense mentioned in the famous talmudic passage called Pittum
Haketoret (Grinding of the Spices). Portaleone was also very interested in pharmacology, and
authored a Latin text De Auro Dialogi Tres (Three Dialogues on the Application of Gold in
Medicine) about the possibilities of a medical use of gold “a topic halfway between alchemy and
medical studies that still created heated scientific debate.” Here is the assessment of historian
Alessandro Guetta in his 2014 work on the history of Italian Jewry:

Four centuries it is indeed true that gold can be used as a medicine. Aurotherapy is used to treat
some kinds of inflammatory diseases like rheumatoid arthritis, and may have a role to play in the
treatment of some cancers and as an agent to improve wound healing. So to add to the Talmudic
categorization of gold based on its color and malleability, we can now thankfully add another: how
useful it is in treating disease.

26
 Gold ring with amazonite seal bearing an inseription in ancient Hebrew
letters (eighth century B.C.) 12

Gold in the Israeli Culture

Janina Altman writes:13

In the Bible, gold is the most frequently mentioned of all metals but almost no gold objects have
been found from the Israeli period of Palestine (1200 to 587 B.C.). Nevertheless, crucibles have
been unearthed in Gezer and in Akko so that there is no doubt that the goldsmith's craft was
practised by the Hebrews.

To date, however, only a few hoards have been discovered, in Gezer, Akhsiv and in Beth Shemesh,
and they have consisted of relatively simple gold earrings, beads of various sizes and shapes,
similar to those from the previous Canaanite period, and discs executed in repoussé with dots and
holes apparently intended for sewing onto garments. In Gezer, two gold ingots have been found,
one is a circular disc, 6.4 cm in diameter and weighing 348 g, and the other is a bar weighing 858
g and 25.7 cm long and 0.64 cm thick. The Jatter is 2.9 cm wide at one end and tapers down to 2.3
cm at the other, producing a tongue-like shape that recalls the 71t'5 (lashon) or 'tongue' of gold
('wedge' in the English version) which Achan stole from the fallen Jericho (Jos., 7:21). The

12
Photograph by courtesy of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem
13
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/81874864.pdf

27
coincidence suggests that this was a usual form for gold bars used for trade between 1500 and
1000 B.C. According to analysis the gold is very pure.

The Bible mentions Arabia, Sheba, South Arabia and Ophir as sources of gold. The geographical
location of Ophir remains the object of much speculation. American and Saudi geologists
suggested in 1976 that it may have been situated between Mecca and Medina (9). However, this
finding can easily be disputed on the basis that, had this been the case, overland expeditions would
have been possible, and probably preferred, from Israel to Arabia and back. Different methods are
described in the Bible for working in gold. Casting was probably employed for making the Golden
Calves (Ex., 32:4; I Kings, 12:28). Gold sheets were used to make gold wire or thread: `And they
did beat the gold into thin plates, and cut it into wires to work it in the blue, and in the purple, and
in the scarlet, and in fine linen, with cunning work.' (Ex., 39:3)

The cherubim and the gold candelabrum for the Tabernacle were made of beaten gold. Jerusalem
were made of one piece, together with the lid of the Ark and the candelabrum was beaten in one
piece out of talent gold (Ex., 25:17 to 19). Also, gold overlay was applied to the surrounding
wooden boards in the Tabernacle. In Egypt, gold mining was state run and goldsmiths either
bought their màterial from the state or worked in a temple under the supervision of priests. In
contrast, the work in gold for the Tabernacle was performed by a man specially chosen from
outside the priest caste:

`See, I have called by name Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah; And
I have filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge,
and in all manner of workmanship, To devise cunning works, to work in gold, and in silver and
in brass, ... '(Ex., 31:2 to 4).

Later, large quantities of gold were concentrated in King Solomon's hands and were dedicated to
the construction of the First Temple in 967 B.C. (I Kings, 6:20 to 35; 7:46 to 51) and of his palace.
During King Solomon's reign, the economy and cultural life of Israel reached a zenith, owing to
the good mutual relations with neighbors, mainly with Hiram the Phoenician ruler of Tyre. Hiram,
at Solomon's request, provided materials and workmen to help build the Temple in Jerusalem (I
Kings, 5:1 to 18; 7:13 and 14). The Temple of Solomon was plundered on several occasions and
nothing has remained of its splendors.

The only immediate source of comparison in styles and subjects, according to J. W. and G. M.
Crowfoot (10), is to be found in the excavations of Samaria, where remains of the `House of Ivory'
of Ahab (876 to 822 B.C.) have been found. Several small ivory plaques from Ahab's palace,
decorated with palmettes and colored with insets of glass and gold leaves, are exhibited in the
Israel Museum in Jerusalem and serve as an indication of what was accomplished with gold-
overlaid wood in the Temple of Solomon.

The impression gained from the Bible and from modern research is that the use of gold for
decoration was reserved for royalty and cultic purposes. Hebrew inscriptions on gravestones of the
eighth and seventh centuries B.C. indicate that it was not the custom to put objects of value into
the burial caves (11) and there seems to have been very little gold in private hands. The main
accumulation of gold vessels and treasures was in the Temple and an indication of the size of this

28
collection is given in a description of some of the treasures returned by Cyrus, 50 years after the
destruction of the First Temple (586 B.C.): ..

thirty chargers of gold, a thousand chargers of silver, nine and twenty knives, Thirty basons of
gold, silver basons of a second sort Tour hundred and ten, and other vessels a thousand.

All the vessels of gold and silver were live thousand and four hundred.' (Ezra, 1:9 to 11)

Some idea of the size of the golden table and the shape of the golden candelabra in the Second
Temple is given by Josephus Flavius in `The Jewish War', where he describes the triumphal
procession of Titus in Rome (70 A.D.):

`It is impossible to give a satisfactory account of the innumerable spectacles, so magnificent in

every way one could think of, whether as works of art or varieties of wealth or rarities of nature;
almost all the treasures that have ever come one at a time into the hands of fortune's favorites —
the priceless marvels of many different peoples — were brought together on that day ... Masses of
silver and gold and ivory in every shape known to the craftsman's art could be seen, not as if
carried in procession but like a flowing river . . Most of the spoils were heaped up indiscriminately,
but more prominent than all the rest were those captured in the Temple at Jerusalem — a golden
table weighing several hundredweight, and a lampstand similarly made of gold but differently
constructed from those we normally use.

The tentral shaft was fixed to a base, and from it extended slender branches placed like the prongs
of a trident, and with the end of Bach one forged into a lamp: these numbered seven, signifying
the honour paid to that number by the Jews.'

29
 Reuven Chaim Klein
Rabbi Chaim Klein writes:14

King David famously said that the Torah is more precious than gold. In one passage he writes,
“The Torah of Your mouth is better for me than thousands of gold (zahav) and silver” (Ps. 119:72).
Later in that chapter he exclaims, “I love Your commandments more than zahav and paz” (Ps.
119:127). In yet another passage, King David writes, “They (the Torah’s Laws) are more desirable
than gold and much paz” (Ps. 19:11). In these few passages we have so far encountered two words
for “gold” — zahav and paz. In addition to these two words we will find another three words in
the Bible that refer to “gold”: ketem, charutz, and betzer. This essay will explore these five
different words for “gold” and discuss whether or not they are truly synonymous. Various
commentators suggest that these different words connote different places in which gold is found
and/or different hues of gold.

14
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/finding-the-gold/

30
The most common Hebrew word in the Bible for “gold” is zahav. Along with its Aramaic
counterpart dahav — which is explained by the Hebrew ZAYIN morphing into an Aramaic
DALET — this word appears more than four-hundred times throughout the Bible. The
Talmud (Yoma 44b-45a) states that there are seven types (or grades) of zahav: regular zahav,
zahav tov (“good gold”), zahav Ophir (gold imported from Ophir, I Chron. 29:4), zahav
mufaz (explained below), zahav shachut (“beaten gold,” I Kings. 10:16-17 and II Chron. 9:15-16),
zahav sagur (“fine gold,” this term appears eight times in I Kings 6-7, II Chron. 4 and
9), and zahar parvaim (“gold from a Parvaim,” or “gold whose color resembles a cow’s blood,” II
Chron. 3:6).

A similar tradition about seven shades of gold in King David’s blonde hair can be found
in Tikkunei Zohar (Tikkun #70). [For an alternate list of the seven types of gold, a list that replaces
regular zahav and zahav Ophir with zahav tahor (“pure gold”) and zahav mezukak (“refined
gold”), see Shemot Rabbah 35:1.]

Rabbi Aharon Marcus (1843-1916) explains that the root of the word zahav is ZAYIN-HEY (or
perhaps even just the letter ZAYIN alone), which means “this,” because something shiny and
sparkling like “gold” calls attention to itself. Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (1740-1814) similarly
explains that zahav is derived from the biliteral root ZAYIN-BET which means “flow,” because
when one refines gold the unalloyed gold simply “flows” away from its impurities. [Interestingly,
though zahav literally means “gold,” Ibn Janach and Radak write that the word zahav can be
borrowed to refer to anything pristine and clean (see, for example, Jer. 51:7 and Zech. 4:12).]

A popular etymology of the word zahav argues that it is a contraction of the phrase zeh hav (“give
this”) — an allusion to gold’s role as legal tender. This explanation is cited by such luminaries
as Peirush HaRokeach, Rabbi Todros Abulafia (1247-1306), Rabbi Binyamin HaRofeh Anav (a

31
brother of the author of Shibbolei HaLeket), the Maharal of Prague (1520-1609), Rabbi Eliezer
Papo (1785-1828), and more.

The Torah describes the Pishon River as circumscribing the Land of Havilah, reporting that the
especially good gold is found there (Gen. 2:11-12). In explaining those passages, Nachmanides
explains that this “good gold” is found in the sand and on the shores along the Pishon River. Based
on this, Rabbi Shlomo Aharon Wertheimer (1866-1935) writes that the word zahav is related to
the word zav (“flow”), and denotes the type of gold found near “flowing” bodies of water.

Havilah is probably named after a person named Havilah son of Joktan (son of Eber), who was a
brother to someone named Ophir (Gen. 10:29, I Chron. 1:23). The name Ophir also appears as a
place name for the location from which both zahav (I Chron. 29:4, I Kings 9:28; 10:11; 22:49,
and II Chron. 9:10) and ketem (Isa. 13:12, Ps. 45:10, Iyov 28:16) are brought. Rabbi Pinchas
Eliyahu Horowitz (1765-1821) writes in his Sefer HaBrit that Ophir refers to the South American
country Peru, where large deposits of gold are supposedly concentrated in the Andes Mountains
and in the many rivers that flow across its jungles. Others identify Ophir as someplace on the
Indian subcontinent, with the legendary lost city of Atlantis, with the Phillipines, and even with
Australia. Nonetheless, the accepted understanding amongst scholars is that Ophir is somewhere
in the Arabian Peninsula or in the Horn of Africa (i.e. Ethiopia). Rabbi Yosef Chaim of Baghdad
(1832-1909) identifies zahav Ophir as “white gold” (perhaps platinum or an alloy of gold and
some other white metal), which he claims is found in Russia. The American archeologist William
Foxwell Albright (1891-1971) identifies Ophir with Punt in Somalia.

The word paz appears nine times in the Bible. Although most commentators understand paz to
mean “gold” (as Radak to Ps. 19:11 writes, it specifically means “good and unadulterated gold”),
others disagree. Ibn Ezra (to Ps. 19:11 and Song of Songs 5:11) explains paz as a “precious stone,”
while Rabbi Moshe David Valle (1697-1777) explains that paz refers to “royal jewels” that

32
happened to be made out of gold. As Rabbi Wertheimer puts it, paz is the best type of gold in the
world and is the most rare form of gold.

Rabbi Pappenheim explains that the two-letter root PEH-ZAYIN — from which the word paz is
derived — refers to “fast movement.” Thus, when the Bible describes King David as
being mifazez before the Holy Ark (II Sam. 6:16), this refers to him furiously dancing in honor of
the Torah. Based on this understanding of the root, Rabbi Pappenheim explains that the
word paz refers to extremely pure gold that shimmers in the sunlight as though it were dancing.
He also explains that the adjectives mufaz (I Kings 10:18), me’ufaz (Jer. 10:9), and ufaz (Dan.
10:5) all refer to shiny gold that has a glistening and glowing glimmer. [Rabbi Samson Raphael
Hirsch (to Gen. 49:23-24) notes that there ought to be a connection between mifazez and paz, but
confesses that he does not know what it is. See also Rabbi Hirsch’s comments to Ps. 19:11.]

Others (like Ibn Janach and Radak) explain that the triliteral root PEH-ZAYIN-ZAYIN is separate
from the word paz, and refers to “strength.” They explain mifazez as referring to the “strength”
and “vigor” with which King David danced before the Ark. These commentators explain that when
these words are used to describe gold, mufaz and ufaz refer to gold that is especially unalloyed and
thus “stronger” than other, adulterated types of gold. Radak explains that me’ufaz means “from [a
place called] Uzaf,” which is identified by Targum as Ophir (possibly because the ZAYIN of Ufaz
is interchangeable with the REISH of Ophir).
The word ketem appears nine times in the Bible. Although Ibn Janach first defines ketem as
“jewels,” he concludes that it more likely means “gold,” which is how most commentators explain
the word. Like zahav, ketem is also said to be imported from Ophir, and according to Dr. Chaim
Tawil the very word ketem is said to be derived from the Akkadian word kutimmu and the
Sumerian word kudim which mean “goldsmith.” [Interestingly, Rabbi Moshe Ibn Ezra (1055-
1138) writes that the word ketem in Iyov 31:24 actually means “silver,” even though he agrees that
elsewhere it is a synonym for “gold.”]

33
Alternatively, ketem is derived from the Hebrew root KAF-TAV-MEM, which also means “stain”
or “dirtied” (for example, see Jer. 2:22). Rabbi Pappenheim writes that both meanings of ketem are
actually derived from the monoliteral root KAF, which refers to “hitting.” He explains that KAF-
TAV specifically refers to “beating something through repeated rubbing,” such that ketem refers
to especially pure gold whose malleability allows it to beaten into something very thin. Since such
fine gold is especially eye-catching, the term ketem was borrowed to mean anything which
noticeably sticks out, such as a “stain” or “dirt” on an otherwise pristine background.

The Modern Hebrew word katom (for the color “orange”) is derived from the same root as ketem,
and the Modern Hebrew word tapuz (for the fruit “orange”) is a contraction of the Hebrew
phrase tapuach zahav (literally, “Golden Apple”) — an expression found in Proverbs 25:11. The
English word orange, by the way, is related to the Hebrew/Aramaic word etrog/trunga, as both
are derived from the Old Persian word narang and refer to various citrus fruits. According to
the Oxford English Dictionary, the initial o- in the English form of this word is probably
influenced by the place name Orange, famous for the House of Orange.

The word charutz in the sense of “gold” appears six times in the Bible. This word is actually the
standard Phoenician (Tyrian) and Akkadian word for “gold,” and so some scholars claim that
Hebrew borrowed the word from those languages. On the other hand, Rabbi Marcus explains that
since the root CHET-REISH-TZADI refers to “cutting/digging with a sharp instrument,” gold is
called charutz because it is dug up from underground. Indeed, Rabbi Wertheimer writes that the
word charutz refers to gold found by “digging.” Rabbi Yishaya of Trani (1180-1250) explains that
gold is called charutz because the pursuit of gold makes people “diligent” and “industrious,” which
are alternate meanings of the Hebrew word charutz.

Psalms 68:14 refers to something called yerakrak charutz (“greenish charutz”), which Menachem
Ibn Saruk explains as a type of gemstone. However, Dunash Ibn Labrat and others explain
that charutz refers to “gold” (see also Tosafot to Nedarim 32a) such that this term references

34
greenish gold (perhaps a reference to electrum or gold alloyed with cadmium). Indeed, Radak also
defines charutz as “gold,” while noting that some say that charutz refers to gemstones.

The Israeli archaeologist Dr. Shmuel Yeivin (1896-1982) wrote (under the pen name Shebna) that
the words in question reflect different colors of gold (usually depending on what other metals are
present in the alloy). In fact, the Mishna (Yoma 4:4) teaches that on normal days the fire pan used
for the incense in the Holy Temple would be made of greenish gold, but on Yom Kippur, they
would use one made of reddish gold. Yeivin thus explains that zahav is yellowish gold, ketem is
reddish gold, and charutz is greenish gold. That ketem refers to something reddish is hinted to in
the Mishna (Niddah 8:1), which uses the word ketem as a “blood stain.” Indeed, gold alloyed with
copper — known as “Red Gold” or “Rose Gold” — boasts a reddish color. Additionally, Yeivin
argues that the word paz focuses on the shine/luster of gold, without regard to its particular hue.
The last word in our discussion is betezer. The debate concerning this word centers on a specific
verse in which Eliphaz the Temanite tells Iyov that man’s best hope is to repent “and then you
would have a betezer on the ground and Ophir (i.e. gold) with the rocks of the brooks” (Iyov
22:24, see also Iyov 22:25, 36:19). Ibn Janach, Radak, and Gersonides explain that the
word betezer in this context refers to “gold.” However, other commentators disagree with this
assessment and explain the word differently: Ibn Ezra writes that betzer is “silver,” while Rashi
(following Menachem) writes that it is a “stronghold.” Rabbi Isaiah of Trani explains
that betezer does not actually mean “gold,” but is still related to gold because it refers to the crude
ore which, when refined, can yield gold.

The different colors of gold used in jewelry15

If you are looking for a gold jewel and are looking to find out more about this precious metal, you
may feel a bit lost in any of the colors that gold jewelry can take.

15
https://vivalatina-shop.com/blogs/custom-made-jewelry/the-different-colors-of-gold-used-in-jewelry#ancre_1

35
Indeed, depending on the composition of the alloy, the gold can be white, pink, green or even black if
we consider the modern surface treatments.

These are in all 9 different shades given to gold according to its composition or the surface treatment
received.

Panel of colors taken by gold according to the composition of the gold alloy (source photo)
• Yellow gold
• White and Grey gold
• Pink and Red gold
• Green gold (Electrum)
• Black gold
• Bleu gold
• Purple gold

Colors of gold alloys most commonly used in jewelery

As you may know, gold is a very malleable metal in its pure state, so for fine designs of gold
jewelry it is essential to "harden" it by combining it with other metals .

The silver and copper used for these purposes can change the color of the gold according to their
proportions in the alloy, this feature has long been used in goldsmithery.

The following table shows the shades obtained by combining different proportions of copper and
silver to gold.

36
Nowadays, the "recipes" for coloring gold are more elaborate and also use other metals (Palladium,
Zinc, Platinum ...).

While most jewelers use commercially prepared alloys, some jewelers and major retailers also
have their recipes for making their own gold coloring, a composition whose shades are kept secret.

The information given here is therefore indicative.

In addition to changing the color of gold, the alloy of metals also facilitates the work of gold by
rolling, casting or polishing.

It can also improve the resistance to frictional wear. Innovative gold alloys for their color or
mechanical properties are therefore protected by patent registration.

37
Yellow gold: how to retain the color of gold while improving the characteristics of the metal.

Although gold is naturally yellow, making it keep its color by adding copper and silver requires a
good dosage of each of the metals, because it must also respect the legal titles of gold. This subject
has been treated in this article on the karats of gold.

Composition of 22 k yellow gold (917/1000): 91.7% of fine gold + 5% of silver + 2% of copper

+ 1.3% of zinc

Composition of 18 k yellow gold (750/1000): 75% fine gold + 12.5% copper + 12.5% silver

Composition of 14 k yellow gold (583/1000): 58.3% of fine gold + 11.5 to 25% of silver +
11.5% to 23% of copper + 2 to 7% of zinc

Composition of 9 k yellow gold (375/1000): 37.5% Fine gold + 12.1% silver + 44.4% copper +
6% zinc

View of two chains in 14 k yellow gold whose yellow shade varies due to the
composition of the alloy.

Gray gold and white gold have the same basis:

38
The white gold used in jewelery is very often covered with a layer of rhodium to give it its final
color.
Indeed, most white gold alloys are so named because they include gold-whitening metals,
nevertheless, the final hue in the mass of gold pulls toward the light gray.

Only the use of metals such as Palladium (very expensive), Nickel (banned in France since 2000
because allergen) and Cadmium make it possible to obtain a tinted white gold in the mass.

White gold

Composition of 20 k white gold (833/1000): 83.3% of fine gold + 16.7% of Palladium

Composition of white gold 18 k (750/1000): 75% of fine gold + 18.5% of silver + 1% of copper
+ 5.5% of zinc

Composition of 14 k white gold (583/1000): 58.3% of fine gold + 17% of silver + 17% of copper
+ 7.7% of zinc

Composition of 9 k white gold (375/1000): 37.5% fine gold + 62.5% silver

Grey Gold
Composition of 18 k white gold (750/1000): 75% fine gold + 17% iron + 8% copper

39
 White gold ring with rhodium plating custom made.

The shade of pink gold to red gold depends mainly on copper concentration

It is the copper which gives its more or less red color to the pink gold according to the content of
it in the alloy.

The rose gold was very popular with the Russians at the beginning of the 20th century, hence the
name: Russian Gold.

40
18 karat gold
Composition of 18 k red gold (750/1000): 75% fine gold + 25% copper

Composition of 18 k pink gold (750/1000): 75% fine gold + 22.25% copper + 2.75% silver

Composition of 18 k pink gold (750/1000): 75% fine gold + 20% Copper + 5% Silver

14 karat gold
Composition of 14 k red gold (583/1000): 58.3% fine gold + 32.5% copper + 9.2% silver

Composition of 14 k pink gold (583/1000): 58.3% of fine gold + 24.5% of copper + 17.2% of
silver

9 karat gold
Composition of 9 k red gold (375/1000): 37.5% fine gold + 55% copper + 7.5% silver

Composition of 9 k pink gold (375/1000): 37.5% fine gold + 42.5% copper + 20% silver

41
 Shades of gold rose according to the copper content of gold (source photo)

Green gold also known on the old term of electrum

Green gold is actually a naturally occurring gold and silver alloy called Electrum. Its reflections
range from yellow with light green reflections to more pronounced green.

(750/1000): 75% fine gold + 25% silver

Composition of 14 k green gold (583/1000): 58.3% fine gold + 32.5% silver + 9% copper +
0.2% zinc

42
 18 k green gold ring by jeweler Brien Thomas (source photo)

The exotic colors of gold

Black gold

Although quite rare in jewelry, black gold is still the most used exotic golds. It can be obtained by
surface treatment of gray gold or by alloy of Cobalt with gold then heat treatment.

Composition of 18 k black gold: 750/1000 gray gold + black rhodium surface treatment

43
 18k black gold ring for men
Blue gold

Composition of 18 k blue gold (750/1000): 75% fine gold + 24.4% iron + 0.6% nickel The alloy
is then heat treated in order to oxidize the iron and thus obtain a superficial blue color .

Note that although Nickel jewelery is prohibited in Europe, there are allowable emission
standards. See the decree of 18 July 2000 on the prohibition of nickel in order to find out more.

For more information on blue gold, I invite you to directly consult the patent here.

Another composition, that of the 11 k blue gold (460/1000): 46% fine gold + 54% Indium.

44
 Swiss jeweler Ludwig Muller specializes in blue gold work, check out its
creations here.

Purple gold

Purple gold is brittle and is therefore mostly used in incrustation on gold jewelry more
conventional.

Composition of 19 k gold (800/1000): 79% fine gold + 21% aluminum

Yellow gold ring with purple gold inlay (source photo)

45
 Three Prayers, Three Goals
Chanan Morrison writes:16
The Sages established three daily prayers: Shacharit in the morning, Minchah in the afternoon, and
Arvit (Ma’ariv) in the evening. Why do we need three prayers?

16
http://ravkooktorah.org/TEFILA_68E.htm

46
“Rabbi Helbo taught: One should always be careful regarding the Minchah prayer, for Elijah was
only answered in this prayer.

Rabbi Yochanan said: Also with the evening-prayer, as it says, “May my prayer be like an incense-
offering before You, as I lift my hands in the evening offering” (Psalms 141:2).

Rabbi Nachman bar Yitzchak said: Also with the Shacharit morning-prayer, as it says, “God, hear
my voice in the morning. In the morning I will arrange my prayer to You and wait
expectantly” (Psalms 5:4).” (Berachot 6b)
This Talmudic discussion is peculiar. It starts by stating that the Minchah afternoon-prayer has
advantages over the other prayers and requires special attention. Then the rabbis note that the
morning and evening prayers are also special. If so, all three prayers are equally important. What
does this mean?

Distinct Purposes
Some organs in the human body, like the kidneys, are doubled. This is not because we need two
in order to live, but in case one should stop functioning, we can rely on the second as a backup.
One might think the same holds true for the three prayers. We pray three times a day in the hope
that at least one prayer will be sincere and inspiring. The Talmud, however, rejects this idea. The
rabbis note that each of the three prayers has its own special value. Each prayer meets a particular
spiritual need.
What then is the purpose of each of these prayers?

Restoring the Spirit

Our major spiritual need is to counteract negative and corrupting influences. During the working
day, we encounter all types of people, including some who are crass and unprincipled. These social
interactions affect us, and not for the good. They can reinforce negative traits and lead us to
frivolous and empty goals.
Prayer comes to restore our spiritual purity. We pour out our hearts to God, and the words of prayer
lift us to pure and holy aspirations. Prayer washes away the superficial attraction of falsehood and
the temporary loss of our moral compass.
This spiritual restoration is the purpose of the Minchah prayer. It is prayed in the middle of the
day, when we have the greatest involvement with society.
Now we can understand why Rabbi Helbo brought proof to the importance of Minchah from Elijah.
The prophet’s midday prayer was pivotal in his victory over the false prophets of Ba’al. In his
prayer, Elijah sought Divine assistance to overcome the evil and idolatrous beliefs rampant among
the numerous followers of Ba’al. Our Minchah prayer is a similar plea for help to overcome false
and corrupting influences.

47
Repairing Thoughts
What is the purpose of the evening prayer? Why is it compared to an offering of ketoret-incense?
The ketoret offering was not performed publicly. The incense was burnt within the inner chamber
of the Temple. The Sages taught that the incense atones for sins that are ‘hidden’ — private
thoughts of malice and hatred and surreptitious slander (our daf Yoma 44a, Zevachim 88b). The
inner service of incense was a source of inspiration to cleanse malicious thoughts lurking in the
heart’s inner chambers.
The evening prayer is recited at a time when we have withdrawn to the solitude of our homes. The
root-cause of social sins is the corruptive influence of an egocentric self-love. Like the inner
service of ketoret, the goal of the night-time Ma’ariv prayer is to elevate the spirit and prevent our
souls from being sullied in selfish and petty thoughts.

Awakening the Spirit

What about the third prayer, the morning-prayer of Shacharit?
When we first rise in the morning, the soul’s powers have not been corrupted by external sources.
But they lack vitality and strength, having been dormant while sleeping. Therefore it is necessary
to awaken these spiritual powers. We must arrange them so they will be ready to contemplate
elevated matters — justice and integrity, awe and love of God. This spiritual preparation is the
goal of the morning-prayer.
For this reason, the verse categorizes the morning-prayer as a time when “I arrange my prayer to
You and wait expectantly.” It is the hour when we direct the aspirations of the heart and order the
powers of the soul. After this preparation at the start of the day, we anticipate God’s assistance to
gain spiritual fortitude. As the Sages taught, “Those seeking to purify themselves are granted
assistance from Above” (Yoma 38b).17

17
Adapted from Olat Re’iyah vol. I, pp. 17-18 (introduction); Ein Eyah vol. I, p. 27

48