Talmud - Ta'anit 28b תענית כ״ח ב׳

What is different about hallel that it overrides its own watch, i.e., the watch in the morning service, when hallel is recited; and what is different about the additional offering, that it does not override its own watch, of the morning service, but it does override the watch of the afternoon service and the closing prayer?

Rav Ashi said to him: Now, as the additional offering overrides the watch of the afternoon service, which is not its own, is it not all the more so that it should take precedence over its own watch? Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Ashi: I meant the opposite, as this is what I am saying to you: It should not take precedence over another watch, that of the closing prayer; rather, let it override only its own watch, the one performed in the additional service.

Rav Ashi said to him: There is Rabbi Yosei, who holds in accordance with your opinion, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: On any day on which there is an additional offering, there is a non-priestly watch. The Gemara clarifies: To which non-priestly watch is he referring? If we say that Rabbi Yosei means the non-priestly watch of the morning prayer, but the first tanna also said this. Rather, Rabbi Yosei must mean the non-priestly watch of the additional prayer. However, this too is problematic; is it possible that the additional offering does not override even its own watch, during the additional service itself?

Rather, Rabbi Yosei must be referring to the watch of the afternoon prayer. However, this is also puzzling, for if the wood offering overrides the watch of the afternoon service, the additional offering should certainly take precedence over it. Rather, is it not the case that Rabbi Yosei is speaking of the watch in the closing prayer? One can learn from this that the additional offering overrides its own watch, but it does not override a watch that is not its own. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this that this is the case.

The Gemara asks: And let the mishna also teach: On the first of Nisan there was no non-priestly watch because it is a day on which hallel is recited, and it is the New Moon, on which an additional offering is sacrificed, and there was also a wood offering. Rava said: That is to say that the hallel recited on a New Moon is not required by Torah law but is a custom.

As Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: On eighteen days a year, the individual completes the full hallel. And they are: The eight days of the festival of Sukkot, including the Eighth Day of Assembly; the eight days of Hanukkah; the first Festival day of Passover; and the Festival day of Assembly, i.e., Shavuot. And in the Diaspora, where a second day is added to each Festival due to uncertainty over the correct date, there are twenty-one days, and they are: The nine days of the festival of Sukkot, including the last day, known as the Celebration of the Torah, the eight days of Hanukkah, the first two days of Passover, and the two Festival days of Assembly.

On this topic, the Gemara relates: Rav happened to come to Babylonia, where he saw that they were reciting hallel on a New Moon. Unfamiliar with this practice, he thought to stop them, as he assumed that they were reciting hallel unnecessarily. Once he saw that they were omitting portions, he said: I can learn from this that they are maintaining the custom of their forefathers, i.e., they know that it is a custom, not an obligation. It is taught in a baraita: An individual should not begin reciting hallel on a New Moon, but if he has begun he should complete it.

§ The mishna taught: Five calamitous matters occurred to our forefathers on the seventeenth of Tammuz, one of which was that the tablets were broken. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that the tablets were broken on this day? As it is taught in a baraita: On the sixth of the month of Sivan the Ten Commandments were given to the Jewish people. Rabbi Yosei says: It was on the seventh of that month. The Gemara comments: According to the one who said that they were given on the sixth of Sivan, they were given on the sixth, and on the seventh Moses ascended to Mount Sinai.

According to the one who said that the Ten Commandments were given on the seventh of Sivan, they were given on the seventh, and on the seventh Moses ascended to Mount Sinai, as it is written: “And He called to Moses on the seventh day out of the midst of the cloud” (Exodus 24:16), and it is written: “And Moses entered into the midst of the cloud, and he went up into the mount, and Moses was on the mount forty days and forty nights” (Exodus 24:18). The calculation is as follows: There were twenty-four days remaining in Sivan, plus the first sixteen days of Tammuz, which comes to forty days.

On the seventeenth of Tammuz, Moses descended, came, observed the people worshipping the Golden Calf, and broke the tablets. And it is written: “And it came to pass, as soon as he came near to the camp, that he saw the calf and the dancing, and Moses’ anger burned, and he cast the tablets out of his hands, and broke them beneath the mount” (Exodus 32:19). This shows that the tablets were shattered on the seventeenth of Tammuz.

§ The mishna taught that on the seventeenth of Tammuz the daily offering was nullified. The Gemara explains: It is a tradition that this occurred on that date.

The mishna further taught that on the seventeenth of Tammuz the city walls of Jerusalem were breached. The Gemara asks: Was this tragedy something that occurred on the seventeenth of Tammuz? But isn’t it written: “In the fourth month, on the ninth of the month, the famine was severe in the city” (Jeremiah 52:6), and it is written immediately afterward: “Then a breach was made in the city” (Jeremiah 52:7), which clearly indicates that the city was breached on the ninth.

Rava said: This is not difficult, as here the verse is referring to the First Temple, whereas there, in the mishna, it describes the destruction of the Second Temple, as it is taught in a baraita: Upon the destruction of the First Temple, the city walls were breached on the ninth of Tammuz; and at the destruction of the Second Temple they were breached on the seventeenth of Tammuz.

The mishna further taught that on the seventeenth of Tammuz Apostemos publicly burned a Torah scroll. The Gemara explains: This, too, is a tradition.

The mishna also stated that on the seventeenth of Tammuz Manasseh placed an idol in the Sanctuary. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that this occurred on the seventeenth of Tammuz? As it is written: “And from the time that the daily offering shall be taken away and the abomination that causes appallment is set up” (Daniel 12:11), which indicates that an idol was placed in the Temple on the very day that the daily offering was suspended.

The Gemara asks: And was there only one idol placed there? But isn’t it written: “And upon the wing of detestable things shall be that which causes appallment” (Daniel 9:27)? The plural, “detestable things,” indicates the presence of at least two idols. Rava said: There were initially two idols, but one fell upon the other and broke its hand. Since only one idol was whole, the mishna mentions only that one. Rava continues: And an inscription was found on the broken idol that read:

Traduction : The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz.

Taanit 28b examines how hallel and the additional offering relate to the priestly non-priestly watches, debating which prayers override which service.