Talmudic Justifications for Biblical Stories that Contradict Halacha: Hora'at Sha'ah and Et La’asot - Pt. 2
Moshe - executing the Wood-Gatherer; Ezra - Bringing sin-offerings for intentional sins, as opposed to unwitting sins; Shimon HaTzaddik - wearing the priestly vestments outside the Temple
Two-part series on Hora'at Sha'ah and Et La’asot. Pt. 1 was about Saying God’s explicit name (שם המפורש - the 4-letter name ‘YHWH’ - Tetragrammaton):
Moshe - executing the Wood-Gatherer (מקושש)
According to Numbers 15:32-36, the gatherer (Hebrew מקשש, Mekosheish), or Wood-Gatherer (Hebrew מקושש עצים, Mekosheish Eitzim) was an anonymous Israelite who violated the Sabbath by gathering wood while the Israelites were in the desert, and was brought before Moses, Aaron, and the people for judgement. As the punishment was unknown for such a case, the man was first imprisoned; then, upon God's directive to Moses, he was stoned by the people outside the camp.
Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 80b:
תנא קמא יליף ממקושש
ורבי יהודה אומר מקושש הוראת שעה היתה
Based on the statement of Rabbi Yehuda, it may be inferred that according to the first tanna, although they must inform him (התראה) that he is liable to be executed, they are not required to inform him of the specific mode of execution.
The Gemara explains the basis for the dispute between the first tanna and Rabbi Yehuda:
The first tanna (תנא קמא) derived forewarning from the incident of the wood gatherer (see Numbers 15:32–36), who was executed even though even Moses did not know with which death penalty he was to be executed. Clearly, the mode of execution could not have been included in his forewarning.
Rabbi Yehuda says: The execution of the wood gatherer was a provisional edict (הוראת שעה) based on the word of God. The halakha throughout the generations cannot be derived from it.
Ezra - Bringing sin-offerings (חטאת) for intentional sins (מזיד), as opposed to unwitting (שוגג)
Background info:
“A sin offering (Hebrew: קָרְבַּן חַטָּאת, korban ḥatat, lit: "purification offering") is a sacrificial offering described and commanded in the Torah (Lev. 4.1-35); it could be fine flour or a proper animal.A sin offering also occurs in 2 Chronicles 29:21 where seven bulls, seven rams, seven lambs and seven he-goats were sacrificed on the command of King Hezekiah for the kingdom, for the sanctuary, and for Judah.”
According to rabbinic halacha,
"A regular sin offering (חטאת), brought as an individual sacrifice of a private person, is presented by a Jew who sinned unintentionally (בשוגג), in a type of transgression categorized as a negative commandment (מצוות לא תעשה), where the punishment for doing it intentionally is karet (being cut off - כרת). There are thirty-six types of these transgressions, detailed in the Mishnah."1
Wikipedia, “Return to Zion” (שיבת ציון):
“According to the books of Ezra–Nehemiah, a number of decades later in 538 BCE, the Jews in Babylon were allowed to return to the Land of Judah, due to Cyrus's decree. Initially, around 50,000 Jews returned to the Land of Judah following the decree of Cyrus as described in Ezra, whereas most remained in Babylon. Later, an unknown number of exiles returned from Babylon with Ezra himself.”
Book of Ezra 8:35:
הבאים מהשבי בני־הגולה הקריבו עלות לאלהי ישראל
פרים שנים־עשר על־כל־ישראל
אילים תשעים וששה
כבשים שבעים ושבעה
צפירי חטאת שנים עשר
הכל עולה ליהוה
The returning exiles who arrived from captivity made burnt offerings to the God of Israel:
twelve bulls for all Israel,
ninety-six rams,
seventy-seven lambs
and twelve he-goats as a purification offering (חטאת),
all this a burnt offering to the LORD.
Talmud Bavli, Horayot 6a:
והא מזידין הוו
הוראת שעה היתה
הכי נמי מסתברא דאי לא תימא הכי (עזרא ח, לה) אילים תשעים וששה כבשים שבעים ושבעה כנגד מי
אלא הוראת שעה היתה הכא נמי הוראת שעה היתה
The Gemara asks: But didn’t those who engaged in idol worship in the era of Zedekiah do so intentionally? Sin-offerings are brought for unwitting, not intentional sins.
The Gemara answers: It was a provisional edict (הוראת שעה) issued in exigent circumstances to enable them to sacrifice a sin-offering to atone for an intentional sin.
The Gemara comments: So too it is reasonable, as if you do not say so, then with regard to these “ninety-six rams, seventy-seven lambs,” to what do they correspond?
Rather, the sacrifice of those rams and lambs was a provisional edict (הוראת שעה). Here too, concerning sin-offerings for intentional transgressions, it was a provisional edict.
Shimon HaTzaddik - wearing the priestly vestments outside the Temple
According to the Talmud, when Alexander the Great marched through the Land of Israel in the year 332 BCE, Simeon the Just, dressed in his priestly garments, went to Antipatris to meet him [...].”
Talmud Bavli, Yoma 69a:
אי בעית אימא: ראויין לבגדי כהונה.
ואי בעית אימא: ״עת לעשות לה׳ הפרו תורתך״.
It is apparent from the baraita that Shimon HaTzaddik wore the priestly vestments even outside the Temple. This would seem to be in contravention of the ruling of the other baraita prohibiting this.
The Gemara resolves the contradiction: If you wish, say Shimon HaTzaddik did not wear a set of genuine, sanctified priestly vestments; rather, he wore garments that were fitting to be priestly vestments in that they were made of the same material and design.
And if you wish, say instead that he indeed wore a set of genuine priestly vestments, but in times of great need, such as when one seeks to prevent the destruction of the Temple, it is permitted to violate the halakha, as indicated by the verse: “It is time to act for the Lord, they have nullified your Torah” (עת לעשות לה׳ הפרו תורתך) (Psalms 119:126).
My translation of קורבן חטאת – ויקיפדיה