Tamid and the evolution of the commandment to recite Shema

Yesterday’s Torah portion detailed a number of activities, such as lighting the menorah and offering the daily sacrifices, with which the daily Mishkan workload was scheduled to start and conclude. Several of these activities attract the description 'tamid', which means ‘constant’, a term which sits uncomfortably with the reality that these activities were performed only once or twice a day, in the morning and evening. This difficulty is highlighted by the observation of Rashi, at the start of our parashah, that regular daily events can attract the term tamid even if they are not continuous. Why should this be?

One explanation of Rashi's statement is that the use of the term tamid to describe regular but non-constant activities provides us with a fundamental insight into how the dynamics of these cyclical events are viewed from the Torah's perspective. The opening and closing ceremonies of the Mishkan’s daily routine were not intended merely to supply an element of solemnity or grandeur. Rather, they contextualise and grant legitimacy to everything that happens during the span of time that passes between them. By validating the various offerings that were brought throughout the day, the opening and closing activities can be seen to exert a constant influence and thereby justify the Torah's description of them as tamid. Judaism Reclaimed explores the significance and symbolism of each of these practices in this context.

The importance attached to how a unit of time is commenced and concluded does not just apply to the Mishkan procedures. As part of the Gemara’s discussion of the lechem hapanimprocedure, a comparison is drawn between the use of the word 'tamid' to describe the lechem hapanim, and the requirement that Torah never be absent from one’s mouth. The Gemara concludes that this commandment can be fulfilled even by studying a minimal amount of Torah each morning and evening.

This obligation to fix a regular time for Torah learning each morning and evening, is codified by Rambam and the Shulchan Aruch; it exists in addition to the general obligation to study Torah during any available time. The added dimension of these fixed study times is that they encase a person's mundane activities, imbuing them with the spirit of Torah study and thereby ensure "lo yamush" — that the Torah is never entirely removed from his mouth.

Talmud Reclaimed develops this idea further in a central case study which explores the origins of the commandment to recite Shema twice-daily. Building upon Rambam’s principle, that matters which are disputed among the sages do not belong to the body of transmitted laws received from Sinai, we note that there is a Talmudic argument (Berachot21a) as to whether the mitzvah of Shema is biblical or rabbinic in nature. This would seem to indicate that the commandment was not transmitted immutably from Moshe. On the other hand it does seem to be unanimously accepted in the Talmud that some passage of Torah must be recited, at the very least, each morning and evening.

The suggested resolution, which draws some support from the Pnei Yehoshua and Sha’agat Aryeh, is that the original Sinaitic requirement was that each person commence and conclude their day with the study of some passage of Torah. As seen above, by encasing one’s more mundane daily activities in between sessions of Torah study, this imbues religious and spiritual meaning to all of what one does in the interim period.

At some point, however, the Sinaitic tradition of a biblical commandment to recite words from the Torah twice daily would have been fixed by the Court so as to apply specifically to the first sentence (or perhaps the first paragraph) of the Shema, the second paragraph being added as a purely rabbinic commandment. As suggested by the Pnei Yehoshua, this is likely to be because of the passage of Shema containing a declaration of the unity of God and an acceptance of the yoke of heaven. Matters which the Sanhedrin of the day is likely to have wanted to inculcate further into the hearts and minds of the nation undergoing particular challenges.

While the sages and Sanhedrin enacted this decree to narrow down the previously undefined obligation to study Torah (at least) twice-daily, the blessings recited over Shema may reflect the commandment in its initial undefined form – focusing on the importance of Torah study rather than mentioning the unity of God and accepting His authority and mitzvot.

For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook, click here.

Purposes and pitfalls of repeated rituals

The chapter of Judaism Reclaimed which relates to parashat Tetzaveh exploresa number of activities, such as lighting the menorah and daily korbanot, with which the daily Mishkan workload was scheduled to start and conclude. Several of these activities attract the description 'tamid', which means ‘constant’; a term which sits uncomfortably with the reality that these activities were performed only once or twice a day, in the morning and evening. This difficulty is highlighted by the observation of Rashi, at the start of our parashah, that regular daily events can attract the term tamideven if they are not continuous. Why should this be?

One explanation of Rashi's statement is that the use of the term tamid to describe regular but non-constant activities provides us with a fundamental insight into how the dynamics of these cyclical events are viewed from the Torah's perspective. The opening and closing ceremonies of the Mishkan’s daily routine were not intended merely to supply an element of solemnity or grandeur. Rather, they contextualise and grant legitimacy to everything that happens during the span of time that passes between them. By validating the various offerings that were brought throughout the day, the opening and closing activities can be seen to exert a constant influence and thereby justify the Torah's description of them as tamid.

The burnt Tamid offerings, which open and close the daily sacrifices, are explained by Rabbi S. R. Hirsch as representing Judaism's delicate balance between the interests of the nation and the individual. In order for an individual's private korban to be valid, it must be offered in the time-space between these two public Temidim. This symbolises that, while Judaism provides space for individual expressions of worship, such expressions must acknowledge and respect the boundaries set by the Community.

R’ Hirsch cites Talmudic sources which describe how the Sadducees could not accept the public spirit of the Tamid offering, leading them to reject the notion that it is an obligatory national offering. The Sadducees, he continues, maintained that Jews can connect themselves to God only through the written letter of the Torah which is equally accessible to all, and that each individual is empowered to interpret and reject aspects of the Torah as he sees fit. This approach was mirrored by their rejection of the entire concept that halachah, as determined by the Sages, could regulate the efforts of an individual who is seeking to draw close to God through a korban.

Even though the Temidim were offered only twice daily, the description of 'constant' was thus justified by the crucial context they provided for all of the intervening private korbanot. The principle that the subjective religious expression of individuals must accord with the values of the Nation of God, to whom the Torah and its teachings were entrusted.

The menorah's light is understood in both midrashic and kabbalistic literature to represent the 'illumination' provided by the Torah's wisdom. Through the daily kindling of the Menorah, the Torah emphasises that the korban rituals are beneficial only when they are performed in a way that is consistent with the Torah's spirit and teachings.

Rituals, when practised without a proper understanding of their meaning and significance, have an unfortunate tendency to be stripped of their profound spiritual meaning. While it is true that the performance of all mitzvotis enhanced through a deeper understanding of their underlying meaning, awareness of the purpose and function of korbanot is particularly crucial. This is seen from the fact that manner of offering korbanot was repeatedly singled out for criticism by the prophets, who protested that the korban was being reduced to a superstitious ritual that was merely intended to appease God and persuade Him to ignore their sins. In view of this very real risk – that the korban may ultimately distance people from God rather than drawing them close - we can understand why the daily Mishkan service required the constant influence of the Menorah’s light to provide an essential context. An ongoing illuminating reminder for the entire sacrificial service.

The chapter proceeds to discuss the concept of ‘tamid’as it applies to other concepts in Judaism including the ‘constant commandments’ (mitzvot temidiyot), the obligation of Torah study and God’s ‘constant’ renewal of the world.

First posted on Facebook 5 March 2020, here.