Vol 31.24 - Tetzaveh 1 Spanish French Audio Video
|Hebrew Text: Rambam-Klei HaMikdash
WILL WE ALL DON THE EPHOD IN THE FUTURE TO COME?
1. At the end of Laws of “The Vessels of the Holy Temple and Those Who Serve Therein”1 (at the conclusion of the chapters discussing the Priestly vestments),2 Rambam writes: “You find in the words of the Prophets that the Priests who girded themselves with a linen [apron-like garment called an] ephod (“eighty-five men bearing the linen ephod”3) were not High Priests, for the ephod of the High Priest was not a linen ephod. In fact, even Leviim wore the ephod made of linen. For Shmuel the Prophet was a Levi, and regarding him it is said4 that he was a ‘youth girded in a linen ephod.’ Rather, this ephod was worn by the disciples of the prophets and one who was worthy that the holy spirit would rest upon him, attesting that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit to speak according to the ephod and the breastplate.”5
It must, however, be understood:
Rambam’s work is comprised of legal rulings, [as the Rambam writes in the Preface to Mishneh Torah] “halachos halachos”6 [i.e., it is strictly a legal text]. Thus, why does Rambam write in the conclusion of the Laws of
the Vessels of the Holy Temple, “You find in the words of the Prophets that the Priests who girded themselves with a linen ephod were not High Priests, etc.”? For at first glance, this information has no legal relevance. (If it is because it is the style of the Rambam to conclude each volume of Seifer HaYad with words of inspiration regarding ethics and acquiring positive character traits,7 this segment does not fit that description.) It is, rather, commentary on and elucidation of “the words of the Prophets” (for the verse, “eighty-five men bearing the linen ephod,” does not refer to High Priests, etc.). This passage apparently has no place then in Seifer HaYad.
Kesef Mishna offers the following comment on the wording of Rambam’s law: “He wrote this so that we would not be puzzled by what is written8 about Achimelech son of Achituv: eighty-five Priests wearing the linen ephod.” However, it is still not understood: (In addition to the fact that in this book, Rambam does not concern himself with reconciling and elucidating verses in Tanach9 –) If one wishes to explain that the intent of Rambam is to reconcile his words with Scripture (that the linen ephod mentioned in the words of the Prophets is not the ephod of the High Priest), he should have brought this concept earlier, in the preceding chapter,10 where it speaks about the particular laws of making the ephod. 11
Also, Rambam’s lengthy wording here clearly indicates that his intent is not (only) to explain that the linen ephod mentioned in the words of the Prophets is not of the Priestly vestments (the ephod of the High Priest), because:
a) According to the notion that the innovation of this law is that the linen ephod is not the ephod of the High Priest, why does Rambam continue to explain that the disciples of the prophets garbed themselves in a linen ephod in order to “attest that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest,” emphasizing the opposite of the law that the linen ephod is not associated with the ephod of the High Priest.12
b) Rambam brings proof from the fact that “even Leviim wore it. For Shmuel the Prophet was a Levi, and regarding him it is said that he was a ‘youth girded in a linen ephod.’” At first glance, Rambam should have brought stronger proof by citing the verse,13 “Dovid was girded with a linen ephod,” for Dovid wasn’t even from the Tribe of Levi (more effectively proving that the linen ephod is not associated with the High Priest).14
2. Thus, it appears that Rambam’s intent is not (only) to answer the question that arises from the “words of the Prophets” but to discuss a matter of Torah law, as follows.
We may assert that by writing, “this ephod was worn by the disciples of the prophets,” Rambam’s intent was to introduce a (category of) law regarding the disciples of the prophets (in donning a linen ephod, thereby), “attesting that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit to speak according to the ephod and the breastplate.”
The latter will be understood in light of what Rambam writes in the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah15: “The prophet stands…to inform us of future events that will occur in the world … He even provides information to an individual regarding his personal interests, such as the case of Shaul, who had lost some property and went to a prophet to discover its location.” Thus, in order to enable the Jewish people to identify a prophet to whom they can turn for their needs, the disciples of the prophets would don a linen ephod, “attesting that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit,” for then all the Jewish people would be able to consult with him, etc.16
The above sheds light on Rambam’s order of discussing the topic:
Rambam first clarifies the laws of [the parchment contained within the breastplate of the High Priest, called] the Urim V’Tumim17 [which, in certain circumstances, was used to enhance or facilitate the prophetic experience of the High Priest], writing, “How does one consult (the Urim V’Tumim)? The Priest stands, etc.” and that “they are not consulted for the sake of a commoner, but rather, for the sake of a king, or the court, or for one upon whom the public interest depends.” Then Rambam adds that there is another manner of [Divine] consultation: “a linen ephod…was worn by the disciples of the prophets and one who was worthy that the holy spirit would rest upon him, attesting that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit.” Since “they (the Urim V’Tumim, the ephod, and the breastplate) are not consulted for the sake of a commoner,” therefore, the disciples of the prophets needed to gird themselves in a linen ephod to “attest” to the fact that they had “risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit,” and every single Jew could consult with them regarding all matters, even matters of personal interest.
Accordingly, it is understood why Rambam did not cite the fact that Dovid wore a linen ephod, for Dovid’s wearing a linen ephod was connected with the transfer of the Ark,18 not with the concept of prophecy (“attesting that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit” in order that he could be consulted). Rambam brings his proof instead from the story of Shmuel the Prophet, to whom Shaul went to consult regarding finding his lost property, for such a concern [i.e., one of private interest] could not be brought before the Urim V’Tumim but to a prophet.19
3. However, the following question still remains. This law regarding the “disciples of the prophets” and one who is worthy that the holy spirit should rest upon him, relates, at first glance, to the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah,20 where it discusses the details of the laws regarding prophecy, the ways of prophecy, the conduct of the prophet, and etc., as well as the messages he conveys to the Jewish people (as mentioned above). Why then does Rambam write about this topic in the Laws of the Vessels of the Holy Temple and the Laws of Priesthood?
Notwithstanding the fact that there is a commonality between wearing the linen ephod and wearing the High Priest’s ephod, to the extent that it “attests that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit,” nevertheless, this likeness itself requires explanation. What is the reason for the necessary connection between the especial quality of a prophet, or one who is worthy that the holy spirit should rest upon him (enabling him to foretell future events), and the quality of the High Priest, “who is inspired with the holy spirit to speak according to the ephod and the breastplate”?21
We may answer that this association is in accordance with the approach of Rambam regarding the Urim V’Tumim, as will be discussed.
4. The explanation of the matter:
Regarding the manner whereby a response to questions is received by the Urim V’Tumim, it says in the Gemara22: “Rebbi Yochanan says: They protruded. (The letters [on the breastplate] protruded. For example, the Ayin from ‘Shimon,’ the Lamed from ‘Levi,’ the Hei from ‘Yehuda,’ forming the word ‘ala’ (ascend). Each [letter] did not leave its place [thereby rearranging the order of the letters]. Rather, each letter would protrude in its place and he (the Priest) would combine them.23) Reish Lakeish says: They [i.e., the letters] would combine. (Of their own accord, they would combine [i.e., they would rearrange themselves and spell out the message received from On High]).” The Gemara expresses a difficulty: “Any Priest who does not speak with the holy spirit and upon whom the Divine Presence does not rest is not consulted. For Tzadok asked [for a response from G-d through the Urim V’Tumim] and succeeded, whereas Evyasar did not succeed.” [Thus, it would appear that the Priest has a role to play in receiving the Divine message (i.e., he must determine, through Divine inspiration, how the protruding letters are intended to be ordered) and that the letters, therefore, do not rearrange themselves.] And the Gemara answers: “He would contribute with them.” Rashi elaborates: “The Priest [would contribute along] with it, the Urim V’Tumim. Thus, if the Priest was qualified and worthy that the Divine Presence should rest upon him, the letters would protrude or be rearranged by him [i.e., in his merit] when they consult with it. But if not, they would not protrude or be rearranged.” Rashi, therefore, maintains that the letters themselves would protrude or combine [in the appropriate order] if the Priest was qualified.
However, Rambam writes24: “The holy spirit invests itself within the Priest and he gazes at the breastplate and sees in it, through prophetic vision, whether it says ‘ascend’ or ‘do not ascend’ in letters that would protrude towards him from the breastplate.” Thus, Rambam maintains that the letters would not literally protrude. Rather, they would protrude in the context of prophetic vision.25 (According to this approach, the Gemara’s answer is meant literally [“He (the Priest) would contribute [[all that is required for the Divinely inspired communication] through them (the Urim V’Tumim)”] – that if the Priest was not qualified, he would not see anything through prophetic vision. [The entire process is, therefore, dependent upon the High Priest and his prophetic vision, whereas, according to Rashi, if he were found to be qualified and worthy, the Urim V’Tumim would then do its part and the letters would actually protrude or rearrange themselves.])
From the above it is understood that according to the opinion of Rashi, the response received from the Urim V’Tumim is connected with the object of the Urim V’Tumim itself, insofar as the letters themselves [on the breastplate] would protrude or combine. The opinion of Rambam on the other hand, is that the answer communicated through the Urim V’Tumim is not something that is connected with the actual letters on the breastplate. Rather, the Urim V’Tumim was merely something that contributed to the process by precipitating the prophetic experience of the High Priest.
It seems then that according to Rambam, the communication of the High Priest through the Urim V’Tumim is not an aspect of the topic of Priesthood per se but a category and quality unto itself, entailing another distinction of the High Priest. Namely, his experience of the holy spirit and of prophecy.
However, it is proven from the fact that Rambam writes earlier,26 “They made the Urim V’Tumim in the time of the Second Temple in order to complete the eight garments [of the High Priest],27 notwithstanding the fact that they would not ask [for guidance from On High] through it,” that Rambam is of the opinion that the Urim V’Tumim itself is a component of the High Priest’s vestments28 (unlike those who maintain29 that the Urim V’Tumim is not considered among the Priestly vestments but is the Explicit Name or [other] holy names that were placed within the breastplate and the ephod, and that even if the names were to be absent, one is not lacking the required Priestly garments30). Thus, it comes out that the Urim V’Tumim is a component and an aspect of the Priesthood and the Priestly vestments31 (that is, the complete state of Priesthood and the Priestly vestments as expressed in the High Priest, who wears eight garments); it is not a concept of prophecy but Priestly ministering and service.
We must, therefore, say that, according to the opinion of Rambam, the categorization of High Priest (and his Priestly vestments) entails two aspects: a) The High Priest’s ministering and service; and b) the especial quality of the High Priest with respect to prophecy and the holy spirit32 – that also this (latter) detail, the distinction of the High Priest as a prophet, is a component of the level of the High Priesthood and relevant to the Priestly vestments.33
In parallel, the significance of the Urim V’Tumim is expressed in these two matters: a) it is one of the Priestly vestments; b) asking [for Divine guidance] through it – the concept of (the High Priest’s) prophecy.
5. The above sheds light on why Rambam continues to write, in a law unto itself, about the disciples of the prophets wearing the linen ephod: “You find in the words of the Prophets that the Priests who girded themselves with a linen ephod were not High Priests … Rather, this ephod was worn by the disciples of the prophets and one who was worthy that the holy spirit would rest upon him, attesting that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit to speak according to the ephod and the breastplate.”
We may infer that Rambam’s intent is as follows.
Having established prior to this law that the concept of communicating the answer received through the Urim V’Tumim, inspired by the holy spirit, is something that relates to the High Priesthood and the Priestly vestments, Rambam goes on to explain that the disciples of the prophets had a similar experience, for they too reached this lofty spiritual level of being able to speak with the “holy spirit.”
Indeed, the function of a prophet is not only to inform us of future events, etc., and the like, to benefit the Jewish people, but he is also like a High Priest, whose purpose is to minister before G-d.34
Thus, prophets possess a garment that resembles the ephod of the High Priest.
It is perhaps for this reason that Rambam is precise in his words, elaborating on the comparison of the prophet to the High Priest – “(attesting that this person [i.e., the prophet] has risen to) the height of a High Priest, who is inspired with the holy spirit to speak according to the ephod and the breastplate” – instead of writing more concisely (as his wording above35), “the height of a High Priest, who is inspired to speak with the holy spirit.”36 That is [in including this detailed characterization, likening the prophet to the High Priest], Rambam points out that speaking with the holy spirit is not something tangential (something additional) to the position of High Priest. Rather, it pertains to the very definition of his Priesthood (as above), and of consequence, to the High Priesthood: “[one] who is inspired with the holy spirit to speak according to the ephod and the breastplate.” Thus, every prophet (and one who is worthy that the holy spirit should rest upon him) possesses characteristics of the High Priest. As a result, the prophet has the legal status of one who wears the ephod, though not the ephod of the High Priest but a linen ephod. 37
6. The reason why the disciples of the prophets wore specifically a linen ephod can perhaps [still] be explained in light of the notion that their wearing the garment resembles the donning of the ephod on the part of the High Priest; it is an aspect of Priesthood. The fact that the material differed from that of the High Priest is not only to indicate that they are not High Priests; it can (also) be understood in a positive sense. Namely, that their linen ephod is connected with the special linen garments the High Priest wears on Yom Kippur.
The explanation of the matter:
Evidently, Rambam did not feel that his work Seifer HaYad is the appropriate forum to distinguish between prophecy and [speaking under the inspiration of] the holy spirit. Indeed, he utilizes both terms with respect to the High Priest as well as in connection with prophecy. Regarding the Urim V’Tumim,37* Rambam writes that “The holy spirit invests itself within the Priest…and he sees…through prophetic vision,” and earlier, in Laws of the Foundations of the Torah38: “Prophecy is only manifest in one who, etc. Then [if the person is qualified and proceeds along the path of attaining prophecy] the holy spirit immediately rests upon him.”
However, we find in Rambam’s A Guide for the Perplexed39 a lengthy explanation on the various levels of prophecy, including the distinction between “holy spirit” and “prophecy.” There it explains that the level of [the prophecy of] the High Priest, who is consulted with the Urim V’Tumim, is [only] “Second Degree,” which, in general, is called “holy spirit.” This level of prophetic experience occurs “when awake and the senses are functioning normally.”40 Whereas regarding the definition of a prophet, the Rambam writes earlier, in the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah41: “There are various levels of prophets … All of them, however, only see visions of prophecy in dreams, in nocturnal visions … And all of them, when they are prophesying – their limbs tremble and their body’s strength fails, and their [normal, conscious] cognitive faculties are impaired, etc.” Thus, the classification of “prophet,” as explained in Seifer HaYad, only includes actual prophets (not those who merely speak with the holy spirit, which can occur “when awake and the senses are functioning normally”).
From the above it is understood that although Rambam writes that the disciples of the prophets would wear linen ephods, “attesting that this person has risen [beyond his status as a prophet] to the height of a High Priest, who is inspired to speak with the holy spirit,” his intent is only in general (as he writes in Laws of the Foundations of the Torah regarding prophets, “the holy spirit immediately rests upon him”). But in particular, prophets are actually greater than the High Priest, who speaks with the holy spirit.
At first glance, this is a profoundly novel claim, but it is nevertheless apparently necessary to say. For Rambam explains at length there,38 in the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah, that prophecy requires many conditions and preparations – “Prophecy is only bestowed upon a very wise sage of a strong character, one who is never overcome by his [natural] inclinations in any regard ... He must possess a broad and correct perspective … His body must be [in] perfect [health] … He must sanctify himself and proceed to separate himself from the ways of the nation at large … He must spur himself forward and train his soul not to entertain thoughts on anything insignificant … His mind should constantly be directed upward…to comprehend the holy and pure primordial forms, etc.”41* (as Rambam elucidates there) – but none of these qualities are prerequisites for appointing a High Priest. Rather, we find only that “A High Priest must be greater than his brothers, the Priests, in terms of physical attractiveness, strength, wealth, wisdom, and presence.”42 The latter description does not even approach the conditions required of a person who wants to attain prophecy (which is indeed43 the concept of “disciples of the prophets” – that they conduct themselves according to these conditions in attempt to attain prophecy).44
We may assert that this is also the reason why the disciples of the prophets wore specifically a linen ephod. Namely, to allude to their superiority over the High Priest, “who is inspired with the holy spirit to speak according to the ephod and the breastplate.” For the breastplate and the ephod are among the High Priest’s eight required garments, the Golden Vestments, whereas the “linen (ephod)” is like the “Linen Vestments” of the High Priest, the white garments, he would wear upon entering the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur.45
(To note from the words of Rambam at the end of Laws of the Sabbatical and Jubilee Years: “[The aforementioned] is not restricted to the Tribe of Levi. Rather, any single individual from any background whose spirit is devoted [to this task] and whose mind has come to understand [the great virtue in] separating himself [from the masses] to stand before G-d to minister to Him and serve Him, to know G-d … and he casts off the yoke of the concerns of the masses, the pursuits of mankind, from upon his neck – this person is sanctified as being Holy of Holies.” That is, he reaches not only the height of the Tribe of Levi or the height of the Priests, but the height of the High Priesthood (which is signified by the expression “Holy of Holies,” said specifically of the High Priest: “And Aharon was separated, to be sanctified ‘Holy of Holies’”46). And within this category itself, he attains the height of the High Priest in connection with the “Holy of Holies,” the level to which the High Priest rises on Yom Kippur upon entering the Sanctuary in his white vestments.47)
However, it is understood from many narratives in the Books of the Prophets (and the teachings of our Sages, of blessed memory, on these narratives) that the actual manifestation of prophecy may take place even when one has not attained the aforementioned state that Rambam describes (“a very wise sage…[whose] body is [in] perfect [health] … [who does] not entertain thoughts on anything insignificant [but rather, whose] mind is constantly directed upward”). Thus, we must say (although it is somewhat contrived)48 that Rambam is speaking about the manifestation of prophecy in its complete state. (And even then, when the prophet would be in a state of sorrow, prophecy would cease (temporarily) – to note what our Sages, of blessed memory, say49 [regarding the cessation of Moshe Rabbeinu’s prophecy]: “All 38 years, etc.”) But this is not the proper forum for a thorough analysis of the matter.
7. According to what was spoken about above (Section 2) – that the disciples of the prophets’ wearing the linen ephod is discussed in the context of Torah law [i.e., they wore the garment to identify themselves as prophets, capable of assisting their fellow Jew by communicating to them knowledge of future events] – curiosity is aroused as to what the law will be in the Future to Come, when the promise will be fulfilled,50 “I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh and your sons and daughters will prophecy.” For at first glance, according to what was discussed above, they will all need to wear the “linen ephod,” as did the disciples of the prophets.
Perhaps we may propose that since this promise will be fulfilled in all Jewish people, there will be no need to “attest that this person has risen to the height of a High Priest.” However, there is still room for debate on the matter. For simply speaking, also in the Future to Come there will be varying degrees of prophecy, as Rambam puts it,51 “There are various levels of prophets … one prophet surpassing another prophet” (as it is explicitly mentioned in Scripture52 – that also in the Future to Come there will be a distinction between “their least significant” and “their greatest”). Of consequence, we may submit, that also then there will be the need to ask questions of a greater prophet,53 and there will, therefore, be the need for them to wear the linen ephod [to identify themselves as “greater prophets”]. May it be G-d’s will that through delving into the study of the laws connected with the Priestly vestments, including the “linen ephod” of the “disciples of the prophets,” a Priest will be seen at Tziyon and we will soon merit the fulfillment of the promise, “I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh and your sons and daughters will prophecy,” “for the earth shall be full with the knowledge of G-d as water covers the ocean.”54
(From the address of 15 Tamuz 5747)
1 So is the full name of these laws, as in the beginning of the work HaYad, as well as the title preceding the laws.
3 Shmuel I 22:18 (quoted in Kesef Mishna, as mentioned later in the text).
4 Ibid 2:18.
5 See the Yerushalmi, Tractate Sanhedrin (10:2): “Teaching that they all were worthy to be High Priests.” And as the Rambam comments on the Yerushalmi – that they indeed wore the linen ephod. However, see the Targum on Shmuel I ibid, “that they were fit (k’sherim) to don the linen ephod,” suggesting that they did not actually wear a linen ephod, rather, “they were all worthy of the High Priesthood” (commentary of Rabbeinu Yeshaya on Shmuel I ibid). See Evven Ezra on Parshas Tetzaveh 28:6: “Many commentaries offer this explanation (written in Shmuel I ibid) – that they were [merely] worthy to bear the ephod.” See Footnote 36.
6 Wording of the Rambam in his book’s Preface.
7 See Rambam end of Laws of T’mura: “The majority of the laws of the Torah are intended only…to correct one’s mindset and to straighten out one’s deeds.”
8 Shmuel I 22:18.
9 For even if one wishes to explain that, according to the opinion of Kesef Mishna, the intent of what is written in the Preface of Rambam’s work, “One first reads from the Written Torah (and then he reads from this [from Mishneh Torah], etc.),” is not only regarding the Five Books of the Torah but also Tanach, it is, at first glance, only regarding what is relevant to Torah law and the explanation of the Mitzvos mentioned in the Tanach, but not to resolving and elucidating verses of the Tanach.
10 Chapter 9.
11 Also, then Rambam should have answered the question on the verse, “Eighty-five Priests?! … We don’t appoint [even] two High Priests concurrently!” (as in Yerushalmi Sanhedrin, ibid), as he cites earlier in the Laws of the Temple’s Vessels (4:15, end).
12 And he should have written…, “A linen ephod was worn by anyone who was fit for having the Divine Presence rest upon him, as we find regarding Shmuel wearing a linen ephod .”
13 Shmuel II 6:14. Similarly, Divrei HaYamim I 15:27.
14 And Rambam does not comment that it was a linen tunic of the regular Priest, as in the first explanation of Rabbeinu Yeshaya on Shmuel I, ibid
16 At first glance we may assert that the relevance of this law, even prior to the advent of Moshiach (see Section 7, below), is that even after the time regarding which it is said that the holy spirit has departed from the Jewish people, when the later prophets died – Chagai, Zecharia, and Malachi (Yoma 9b, Sota 48b, among others) – there were several individuals who were worthy of the holy spirit and prophecy, etc.* This law would, therefore, contribute to the discussion as to whether they ought to wear the linen ephod (i.e., a special garment [that would identify them as prophets]), but this is not the proper forum for a thorough analysis of the matter. *(See Rambam’s A Guide to the Perplexed, where it elucidates the verse (Balak 23:23), “In time it will be said to Yaakov,” as follows: “Prophecy will return to the Jewish people in the year 4976 from Creation.” (See Toldos HaOhr HaChayim of Rabbeinu Margolis (Ch. 3 Haaros 25, 26) and his Preface to Responsa from Heaven, where it is explained that it is explicitly mentioned in several places in the words of our Sages, of blessed memory, that the holy spirit did indeed rest upon individuals … throughout the generations [i.e., even following the departure of the holy spirit from the Jewish people].) Regarding all the above, see Likkutei Sichos Vol. 14, pg. 73 ff, where it is discussed.** There it says that this pertains to the law regarding the construction of an alter outside the Holy Temple in our times. See there for in-depth study. See Seifer HaSichos 5751 Vol. 2, pg. 788 ff.)
**In Rambam’s Seifer HaMitzvos, at theend of the Sharashim, it explains that prophecy is only present in the time of the Temple, not in the times of Exile. (See also A Guide to the Perplexed Part 2 Ch. 36: “This is without a doubt the most acceptable, essential reason why prophecy was interrupted in the time of Exile. Namely, on account of lethargy and being downtrodden, etc.” See ibid Ch. 32.) However, there his intent is, at first glance, regarding prophecy in a manner that is constant and permanent and etc. Alternatively, there it is speaking about a lofty level of prophecy and not the holy spirit and the like, but this is not the proper forum for a thorough analysis of the matter.
18 See commentary of Rabbeinu Yeshaya on Shmuel II ibid; the commentary of (attributed to) Rashi on Divrei HaYamim I ibid.
19 As emphasized in the wording of Rambam in writing “Shmuel the Prophet,” notwithstanding the fact that in Shmuel I it is written regarding him that he was a “youth girded in a linen ephod,” without mention of being a “prophet,” but that “Shmuel ministered before G-d.” See Radak and Ralbag there.
20 In Chapter 7 and onward.
21 See Footnote 21 in the original.
22 Yoma 73b.
23 Rashi ibid.
25 See Footnote 25 in the original.
26 Law 10.
27 See Footnote 27 in the original.
28 It is written in several commentaries (Be’er Sheva Sota 48a, Merkavas Mishna LaRambam Laws of the Chosen Temple ibid, HaK’tav V’HaKabala Tetzaveh 28:30, among others) that the opinion of Rambam is that the stones of the breastplate themselves were the Urim V’Tumim* (e.g., the opinion of Rahag, Rasag, and Ranag in Otzar HaGeonim Brachos 4a, among others). However, simply speaking, the wording of Rambam here and in Laws of the Chosen Temple 4:1 suggests that it is an artifact unto itself and not the actual stones of the breastplate, etc. – see Footnote 28 in the original. *It says in Kesef Mishna on Laws of the Chosen Temple ibid: Here Rabbeinu [i.e., Rambam] refers to the breastplate as “Urim V’Tumim” as a borrowed term (similarly in Be’er Sheva Sota ibid). But it is not clear whether his intent is like the commentaries mentioned above who maintain that the breastplate itself is the Urim V’Tumim or that we may assert that also Rambam is of the opinion that the Urim V’Tumim is the Explicit Name [of G-d written on parchment] and it is just that here he calls the breastplate “Urim V’Tumim” as a borrowed term. But this is not the proper forum for a thorough analysis of the matter.
29 The commentary of Rashi Tetzaveh 28:30, Ramban ibid, Raavad in Hasagos on the Laws of the Chosen Temple 4:1 (according to the Kesef Mishna ibid), Ritva Yoma 73b. See Likkutei Sichos Vol. 11 pg. 136 ff., as well as the notes – “according to the opinions” of Rambam and Rashi on the matter.
30 See Ramban on the Torah (cited in the previous footnote), where it suggests somewhat that the linen ephod worn by Shmuel and Dovid contained within it holy names. But this is introducing a concept that is extremely novel! However, perhaps this suggestion can be ruled out, but this is not the proper forum for a thorough analysis of the matter.
31 See Footnote 31 in the original. 32 To note what it says in Zohar II
33 To note the debate whether the Priestly vestments are for the sake of the [Temple] service or for the sake of the Priest – see Beis HaOtzar entry 2-3 principle 10, among others.
34 See the commentary of Radak and Ralbag on Shmuel I 2:18.
35 In Law 10 (from Yoma 73b). 36 See Footnote 36 in the original.
37 That is to say that even though the main reason to wear the linen ephod is (as Rambam clarifies) “to attest that this person…speaks with the holy spirit” [i.e., to allow others to identify him as a prophet, one who can assist them, for example, by telling the future] (and as discussed above, the legal significance of this point), nevertheless, the fact that this is signified by wearing specifically a linen ephod is because he also possesses characteristics resembling Priesthood (for which reason Rambam includes this segment in the Laws of the Vessels of the Holy Temple and not in the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah [which discusses prophecy]).
37* Law 11.
39 Vol. 2, Ch. 45.
40 See also the commentary of Ramban on Tetzaveh ibid. Bachai Bracha 33:8. 41 7:2. NOTES:
41* [Based in part on the translation of Rabbi Eliyahu Touger.]
42 Laws of the Temple’s Vessels, Ch. 5, beg.
43 See Rambam’s Laws of the Foundations of the Torah, ibid Law 5.
44 See Abarbanel on Parshas Tetzaveh (in response to the eighth question – see there), where he explains the purpose of the Urim V’Tumim, which is to “make it easier to attain the level of the holy spirit, akin to the level of prophecy. Thus, prophecy required time and the appropriate preparation, whereas regarding the Urim V’Tumim, the Priest who was designated for the task required no more than a nominal meditation and preparation to attain the response [from On High], which is not so with regard to prophecy.” To note what it says in Sota 48b; Iyun Yaakov on Ayin Yaakov ibid. 45 Laws of the Temple’s Vessels 8:3; Laws of the Service on Yom Kippur Ch. 2, beg.
46 Divrei HaYamim 23:13.
47 See Footnote 47 in the original.
48 See Footnote 48 in the original.
49 Taanis 30b, end; Yerushalmi ibid (3:4), among others; cited in Rashi’s commentary on the Torah on Parshas D’varim 2:16. See A Guide For the Perplexed Vol. 2, Ch. 36.
50 Yoel 3:1.
51 Laws of the Foundations of the Torah 7:2.
52 Yermiyahu 31:33.
53 See Footnote 53 in the original.
54 Yeshayahu 11:9.