RABIN MISHNAH STUDY GROUP


TRACTATE TAMID, CHAPTER SEVEN

Mishnah 1 | Mishnah 2 | Mishnah 3 | Mishnah 4


, , , , . , , , :

Whenever the High Priest enters to prostrate himself three others support him: one on his right, one on his left and one the precious jewels. When the superintendent heard the sound of the High Priest coming out he would raise the partition for him, enter, prostrate himself and leave. Then all his fellow priests would prostrate themselves and leave.

EXPLANATIONS:

1:
The classical commentators have a field day with part of our present mishnah, for in its simple meaning it seems to be suggesting that the High Priest had the privilege of coming to prostrate himself at this point; however, this prostration was an integral part of the ritual of the sacrifice of the Tamid, a kind of leave-taking by those who had taken part in the ceremony. So how could the High Priest come to prostrate himself at will if he had not previously taken part in the ceremony? We might suggest that the High Priest is to be seen as an exception, that the position brings its own special privileges. This may be so, for in the latter part of the Second Temple period the High Priest was an appointee of the government. But this prostration could not have been one of those perks that went with the job, for it contravenes an explicit order of the Torah [Leviticus 16:1-2] itself:

– – : – – – – – – – –:

God spoke to Moses, after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew near before God, and died; and God said to Moses, 'Tell Aaron your brother, not to come at all times into the Most Holy Place within the veil, before the mercy seat which is on the ark; lest he die: for I will appear in the cloud on the mercy seat.

In other words, Aaron (the prototype of the High Priest) is not to come before God whenever he pleases. Rabbi Ovadya of Bertinoro in his commentary on our mishnah distinguishes between the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies, which is only permitted on Yom Kippur, and his entering the sanctuary at will, which 'would not be called entering to no purpose'. But it cannot be this simple, since the Gemara [Menachot 27b] states that the prohibition against 'entering at will' applies to the sanctuary as well as the Holy of Holies, the only difference between the two being the degree of punishment for an infringement. Rabbi Yom-Tov Lipmann Heller, in his commentary on our mishnah, suggests that the problem can be solved by understanding the prohibition of the Torah as referring to a purposeless entering of the sanctuary, which would not include the High Priest entering for the specific purpose of prostrating himself, together with 'his fellow priests'.

2:
However, in view of statements that appear later in our present chapter, it seems to me that there is another explanation that can be offered. The High Priest, it seems, could participate in any part of the ceremony without having to take his chances in a lottery. The Mishnah [Yoma 1:2] states that during the week before Yom Kippur the High Priest would perform many of the items in the daily ceremony in order to accustom himself to the ritual which he would be required to perform on the Day of Atonement:

, , , . , , , :

For all seven days he would sprinkle the blood, offer the incense, trim the lights and offer the head and foot. Any other time [of the year] if he so chose he could offer [these limbs]...

So would it not be the most simple of solutions to suggest that on a day when the High Priest had volunteered to take part in the offering of the Tamid, like his fellow priests, he would conclude his participation by entering the sanctuary in order to prostrate himself. The only difference between him and the rest in this matter would then be the details added in our present mishnah.

3:
When he entered he would be accompanied by three priests. One of them would be there to support his right, one his left and one would be there to deal with 'the precious jewels'. The Torah [Exodus 28:6-28] describes the uniform of the High Priest in detail. Part of that description reads as follows:

– : – – : : – – : – – : – – : – – – : : – –: : : : : : : – – – – : – : – – – : – – – : – – – : – – – : – : – – – – :

They shall make the ephod... It shall have two shoulder-pieces joined to the two ends of it, that it may be joined together... You shall take two onyx stones, and engrave on them the names of the children of Israel: six of their names on the one stone, and the names of the six that remain on the other stone, in the order of their birth. With the work of an engraver in stone, like the engravings of a signet, shall you engrave the two stones, according to the names of the children of Israel: you shall make them to be enclosed in settings of gold. You shall put the two stones on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod, to be stones of memorial for the children of Israel: and Aaron shall bear their names before Yahweh on his two shoulders for a memorial... You shall make a breastplate of judgment, the work of the skillful workman; like the work of the ephod you shall make it... You shall make on the breastplate chains like cords, of braided work of pure gold. You shall make on the breastplate two rings of gold, and shall put the two rings on the two ends of the breastplate. You shall put the two braided chains of gold in the two rings at the ends of the breastplate. The other two ends of the two braided chains you shall put on the two settings, and put them on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod in the forepart of it... You shall make two rings of gold, and shall put them on the two shoulder-pieces of the ephod underneath, in the forepart of it, close by the coupling of it, above the skillfully woven band of the ephod. They shall bind the breastplate by the rings of it to the rings of the ephod with a lace of blue, that it may be on the skillfully woven band of the ephod, and that the breastplate may not swing out from the ephod.

The ephod was a kind of sleeveless jacket with shoulder pieces. Each of the shoulder pieces had a precious stone attached to it. Over the ephod was a breastplate which was secured to the ephod so that it would not swing away. The task of the third priest was to make certain that the precious stones set into the shoulder pieces of the ephod were not damaged or loosened and that the breastplate did not swing away from the ephod.

4:
When the superintendent heard the sound of the High Priest coming out. Coming out of where? Rabbi Yom-Tov Lipmann Heller suggests that we understand the sentence as saying that when he could hear the sound of the High Priest 'coming out from wherever he was coming in order to enter the sanctuary'. This seems very forced. It seems far more likely that the meaning of the phrase is that the superintendent hears the High Priest coming out of the sanctuary after his prostration. During the prostration each priest, including the High Priest, would be completely alone. Concerning the High Priest the Torah [Leviticus 16:17] states categorically:

– – :

There shall be no one in the Tent of Meeting when he enters to make atonement in the Holy Place, until he comes out, and has made atonement for himself and for his household, and for all the assembly of Israel.

This privilege of solitude was understood to apply to all priests, not just the High Priest. Therefore, the best interpretation of our mishnah seems to be that when the superintendent heard the High Priest approaching to leave the sanctuary after his prostration he would raise the partition which covered the entrance for him as a mark of respect. The approach of the High Priest was distinctive. The Torah [Exodus 28:31-35] states:

– : – – : – – : – : – – :

You shall make the robe of the ephod all of blue. It shall have a hole for the head in the midst of it: it shall have a binding of woven work round about the hole of it, as it were the hole of a coat of mail, that it not be torn. On its hem you shall make pomegranates of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, around its hem; and bells of gold between them round about: a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, on the hem of the robe round about. It shall be on Aaron to minister: and the sound of it shall be heard when he goes in to the holy place before God, and when he comes out, that he not die.

So the tinkling of the bells on the hem of the High Priests robe would announce his approach even to someone on the other side of the curtain partition.

5:
When the High Priest and completed his prostration it was the turn of the Superintendent to do likewise. After him all the other priests, one by one, would enter the sanctuary to prostrate themselves and then leave.

. , , , , , . , , . , . , , , . , , , :

They now came to stand on the steps of the Vestibule. The first ones stood to the south of their brother priests holding the five articles: one of them held the basket, another held the pitcher, another the ember-scoop, another the incense-scoop, and the ladle with its cover was held by another. They blessed the people as one blessing, which in the rest of the country was uttered as three blessings, but in the Temple as one. In the Temple they would utter the Name as it is written, but in the rest of the country as its surrogate. In the rest of the country the priests would raise their hands as far as their shoulders, but in the Temple above their heads - with the exception of the High Priest who does not raise his hands above the Plate. Rabbi Yehudah says that even the High Priest raises his hands above the Plate, since it says 'Aaron raised his hands to the people and blessed them' [Leviticus 9:22].

EXPLANATIONS:

1:
We now come to the Priestly Blessing. In order to utter this blessing all the priests who were present would arrange themselves on the steps of the Vestibule. We have already mentioned on several occasions that the Vestibule, the impressive main entrance to the sanctuary from the Priests Court, was approached by a flight of twelve steps. Let us imagine yet again that we are members of the Maamad, standing way back in the so-called Court of the Israelites. This was a narrow strip just inside the Priests Court as one came through the Nicanor Gate from the so-called Womens Court. Although the massive main altar is probably blocking the view for some of us, those on the far right as we face the sanctuary probably have a good view of the steps leading up to the Vestibule. We can see that the priests were sorting themselves out, facing us, with five priests standing on the far left of the others.

2:
These five priests are the five who have taken an active role in what went on inside the sanctuary. One had cleared the incense altar of its cold embers; another had shovelled on fresh embers; another had offered the incense and the fourth had been his friend or relative who had assisted him; the fifth was the priest who had seen to the candelabrum. They were still carrying the implements that they had used to carry out their tasks: the basket into which the cold embers had been removed, the pitcher which held the old oil and wicks from the candelabrum, the scoop in which the new burning embers had been brought, the large ladle which had held the smaller scoop which had held the incense ready to be sprinkled on the embers on the golden altar. Our mishnah omits to mention how, when and where they put down these implements in order to take part in the priestly blessing. Presumably they set them down on the steps in from of them.

3:
The Torah [Numbers 6:23-27] requires the priests to bless the people daily. Since this ceremony is still observed by tradition in many synagogues perhaps we should expand a little on this theme. First of all the Torah makes very clear that the priests are not blessing the people; rather they are invoking Gods blessing on the people: 'They shall set my Name upon the Israelites and I shall bless them' [Numbers 6:27]. Thus the priestly blessing is not a privilege but a duty, a command, a Mitzvah. We have mentioned on several occasions that during the existence of the Bet Mikdash the right to take an active part in priestly functions was carefully watched and the pedigree of all priests was meticulously vetted. Nowadays those claiming to be priests by descent are recognized as such on presumption only - what reason could they have for inventing such a pedigree nowadays. Thus in Temple times only those priests whose pedigree was established and noted were permitted to officiate; nowadays anyone who has been told that he is of priestly descent by someone who has reason to know (usually a parent) is included in the duty to invoke Gods blessing on the Jewish people.

4:
In the Bet Mikdash the priestly blessing was uttered every day, as our mishnah explains. This was also the case 'in the rest of the country'. In the diaspora it became the custom to restrict this ceremony to just a few days in the year. The justification was that when Israel is living the miserable life of an exiled people no one has the necessary joy in their souls to fulfill the divine behest of blessing the people 'in love'. Only on festivals, when we are particularly and specially happy could it be presumed that we have the necessary joy in our hearts. Chassidic sects, who consider it to be a religious duty to always be as happy as possible, re-established the custom of having the priests invoke Gods blessing on the Jewish people every day. This daily invocation is the almost universal rule in the State of Israel today.

5:
An effort is made to ensure that no one should imagine that the priests are blessing the people and that everyone should realize that it is God who is doing so. First of all, nowadays, the priests are summoned, by the cantor, to perform their duty. Secondly, they pronounce a berakhah in which they state that their sanctity is an inherited one, not a personal characteristic, and that God has commanded them to 'lovingly bless His people Israel'. Thirdly they are not seen when they invoke the blessing: people are encouraged not to look at them and they cover the upper part of their body with their Tallit so that they not be seen. Lastly, the words of the blessing are dictated to them word for word so that it is clear that they are not 'ad libbing'.

5:
The priests were now ready to pronounce the blessing. Our mishnah points out that the manner of uttering this blessing was different in the Bet Mikdash than elsewhere in several respects. In the Bet Mikdash the three verses of the blessing [Numbers 6:24-26] were uttered sequentially without interruption; outside the Bet Mikdash they were (and are) uttered as three separate verses, with the people answering Amen after each one. (In the Bet Mikdash the response was never Amen. Rambam [Mishneh Torah, Tefillah, 14:9] says that the response was 'Blessed be Israels God for all eternity' [Psalm 106:48]. In the Bet Mikdash the proper Name of God was pronounced by the priests in its ancient pronunciation, now lost, and not by the pious substitution 'Adonai'. When we studied Tractate Sanhedrin I wrote:

Halakhah recognizes seven terms for the Deity which are so holy that they may not be erased [see Rambam, Yesodei ha-Torah 6:2]. I shall quote them in transliteration since it is only in their Hebrew format that they are considered ineradicable: El, Elo'ah, Elohim, Elohei, Shaddai, Tzeva'ot and the Tetragrammaton - the four Hebrew letters Yod-Heh-Vav-Heh, which is nowadays uttered as 'Adonai'. Of all these seven on the last is considered so holy that using it in an imprecation constitutes sacrilege. The original pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton has been irretrievably lost for nearly two millennia. Whenever the term is used in the Bible or Prayer-Book we substitute for it the surrogate term 'Adonai' [Lord]. The Massoretes, who were responsible for transmitting the Biblical text to us in its present format, added the vocalization of the word 'Adonai' to the letters of the Tetragrammaton in order to remind the reader to read the term 'Adonai'. When non-Jews read the Hebrew text they misunderstood, and started construing this term as if it were a real word, thus creating the nonsensical proper noun 'Jehovah'. This word has no basis whatsoever in Jewish tradition.

6:
One of the items of the High Priests special vestments was a plate which he wore around his head on his forehead. It is described in the Torah [Exodus 28:36-38]:

: – – – – : – – – – :

You shall make a plate of pure gold, and engrave on it, like the engravings of a signet, 'Holy To God.' You shall put it on a lace of blue, and it shall be on the sash; on the front of the sash it shall be. It shall be on Aaron's forehead, and Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Israel shall make holy in all their holy gifts; and it shall be always on his forehead, that they may be accepted before God.

Tanna Kamma says that unlike the rest of the priests, who raised their hands high above their heads in blessing, the High Priest never raised his hands above his shoulders so as not to raise them above the height of the Plate. Rabbi Yehudah ben-Ilai disputes this statement of Tanna Kamma, but as is usual in such cases, his opinion is not accepted. Outside the Bet Mikdash all priests behave like the High Priest.

, . , . , . , , . . , . , . . , , , , . , , , . , . , , , . , , . , . , . , :

When the High Priest wished to make the offering he would go up the ramp with the Deputy on his right. When he was half-way up the Deputy would take him by the right hand and escort him up. The first would hand him the head and the foot, he would rest his hand on them and throw them. The second would hand to the first the two forelegs which he would hand to the High Priest who would rest his hand on them and throw them. The second would retire. And thus would they hand to him all the rest of the limbs: he would rest his hand on them and throw them. Should he so choose he might rest his hand on them and others would throw them. Where does he start when he would walk around the altar? - from the south-eastern corner, through the north-eastern, the north-western to the south-western. They handed him the wine for the libation. The Deputy would be standing at the corner holding banners, while two priests were standing on the Intestinal Fat Table holding two silver trumpets. They would sound Tekiah, Teruah and Tekiah, and then they would go and stand next to ben-Arza, one on either side of him. When he bent down to make the libation the Deputy would wave the banners, ben-Arza would clash on the cymbals, and the levites would break into song. When the reached the end of a section they would sound a Tekiah and the people would prostrate themselves. With each section a Tekiah and with each Tekiah a prostration. This was the order of the Tamid ritual in the House of our God. May it be His pleasure that it be rebuilt soon in our days, Amen.

EXPLANATIONS:

1:
With the conclusion of the priestly blessing the ceremonial could now draw to its conclusion. A long excursus describing the ritual with the candelabrum, the offering of the incense and the priestly blessing may have caused us to forget the actual sacrifice itself. We must recall that after the lamb had been slaughtered the various parts of its carcass had been carried ceremonially from the slaughter house to half-way up the ramp (at which point the priests had paused for their prayer ritual, and then those same limbs had been ceremonially carried to the top of the altar. The sacrifice must now be concluded by consigning the limbs of the dismembered animal to the flames. Normally this would now be done by the nine priests who had gained the privilege of carrying the limbs to the top of the altar, each in turn. However, our present mishnah chooses to describe the procedure when the High Priest decides that he wishes to perform this task himself.

2:
The Mishnah [Yoma 1:2] tells us that during the seven days leading up to Yom Kippur [the Day of Atonement] the High Priest was required to perform all the major functions of the ceremony in order to refresh his memory with every aspect of the ritual:

, , , . , , , :

He would sprinkle the blood, offer the incense, tend to the candelabrum and offer the head and the foot. On all other occasions if he so chose he could do so because the High Priest takes precedence in all such matters.

It occurs to me that on those days when the High Priest did decide to do the job himself it must have been a great disappointment for those priests who had gained these privileges in the lottery and now the High Priest comes along and 'rains on their parade' as it were. It is for this reason, perhaps, that those 'cheated' of their hour of glory were compensated by at least being able to hand the limbs that they were carrying to the High Priest. (Actually, this was the case only for the first of the nine, each of the other eight handed their items to him and he handed them to the High Priest. Vicarious glory.)

3:
There are certain aspects of our mishnah that suggest to me that what it is describing is something very specific and is not a general description. My guess is that what is described here is what happened in the last days of the Bet Mikdash in its glory. Possibly, with the end already in view as it were, it was felt that Heaven might show mercy if the ritual were performed by the High Priest. Firstly, our mishnah describes a High Priest who was elderly and was not able to make it to the top of the ramp without the assistance of his Deputy; surely not all High Priests were like this. Secondly, once again one of the permanent staff of the Temple is mentioned by name: ben-Arza. The Mishnah [Shekalim 5:1] gives a list of these functionaries in the last days of the Bet Mikdash and ben-Arza is mentioned as being in 'charge of the cymbals'.

4:
In a previous paragraph we have hinted at the procedure. The limbs would be handed to the High Priest one by one. He would rest his hand on each one and then throw it into the flames of the main fire-stack. The 4th mishnah of Chapter 2 taught that the main fire stack was built up on the eastern side of the altar, with its rearmost twigs reaching the ash pile in the centre of the altar. Even so, if the priest were standing at the top of the ramp (which is what is suggested by what follows in our present mishnah) it would be quite a hefty throw to land these limbs from the southern edge of the alter even to the centre. At the very top, where the priests stood, the altar was about twelve metres square; even if the fire stack were as wide as it was deep the priest would still have to throw these limbs more than a couple of metres. Perhaps this is why, on occasion, our present mishnah says that the High Priest would permit others to do the throwing for him.

5:
After all the limbs had been consigned to the flames another ritual was to be performed, that of the libation of wine. The wine was poured onto the altar on the south-western corner of the altar. (If we are standing with the Maamad in the section of the Azarah reserved for them, just inside the Nicanor Gate, the south-western corner of the altar would be on the left hand corner farthest from us. This means that a priest standing at the top of the ramp only had to take a few steps to his left in order to reach that corner - and this was exactly what did happen when an ordinary priest offered the libation. However, when it was the High Priest who was to offer the libation, by his choice, he walked all the way round the altar to get there, first turning to his right and then making his way all around the altar until he reached the corner that had originally been nearest him on his left. He was accompanied by his Deputy. (There was always a Deputy High Priest who could step in at a moments notice should any ritual disqualification prevent the High Priest from performing his duties.)

6:
It was necessary that the exact moment of the offering of the libation of wine be made known to the levitical choir and orchestra who were situated on the other side of the Nicanor Gate, on the platform at the top of the flight of fifteen steps leading down to the so-called Womens Court. There were two trumpeters standing on a table in readiness. This table was the one use for dealing with the intestinal fat of the sacrificial victim (so I hope no one ever slipped and fell off). The trumpeters would sound Tekiah, Teruah and Tekiah, and this was a warning to everyone to pay attention for the libation was about to take place. When the High Priest (or any other priest) bent down to pour the wine out of the pitcher onto the altar the Deputy High Priest would wave a flag, and 'ben-Arza who was in charge of the cymbal' would clash his cymbal which was an audible signal to the levitical choir to start signing the psalm of the day.

, , ' . , . , . , . , , . , ' . , , :

The song that the levites would sing in the Temple. On Sundays they would sing Psalm 24. On Mondays they would sing Psalm 48. On Tuesdays they would sing Psalm 82. On Wednesdays they would sing Psalm 94. On Thursdays they would sing Psalm 81. On Fridays they would sing Psalm 93. On Saturdays they would sing Psalm 92 - a song for the uttermost future, for the day that shall be completely Shabbat, rest in life eternal.

EXPLANATIONS:

1:
At the precise moment when the libation of wine was poured onto the altar the levites would begin to sing the psalm of the day, as outlined in our present mishnah.

2:
I should point out here that our present mishnah only outlines the psalms that were sung on 'ordinary' occasions. From several places in the Gemara we learn that on special days (Rosh Ĥodesh, Ĥol ha-Moed and Yom Tov [New Moon, the Intermediate days of Passover and Tabernacles, and the Festivals] the levites would sing special psalms and not the psalm that they would have sung on that weekday. About 250 years ago Rabbi Eliahu, the Gaon of Vilna, established in his entourage that the psalms that were sung in the Bet Mikdash should be the psalms that were recited in the synagogue. For reasons that are not really clear, most congregations have been lax in this regard and just read the psalm of the day as outlined in our present mishnah. In a fairly comprehensive responsum on the matter, published by the Vaad Halakhah of the Rabbinical Assembly in Israel, Rabbi David Golinkin re-enunciates the practice of the Vilner Gaon: only one psalm is to be said on any given day and the psalms for the special days take precedence over the psalms mentioned in our mishnah (except for Shabbat).

3:
The previous mishnah described in broad outline how the psalms were sung. At the sound of the cymbal the levites would break into song. The signal of the cymbal was necessary, of course, because the singers could not see what was going on in the priestly court. Each psalm was divided into sections. We do not know how they were divided nor how many verses there were in each division. Perhaps the divisions were a function of the melody (which is now unknown). When the choir and orchestra reached the end of a section each of the two priests in the priestly court would sound his shofar. At the sound of the shofar all the people would prostrate themselves. As the previous mishnah stated: 'With each section a Tekiah and with each Tekiah a prostration.'

4:
The previous mishnah ended with the following sentence: 'This was the order of the Tamid ritual in the House of our God. May it be His pleasure that it be rebuilt soon in our days, Amen.' This sentence sounds suspiciously like the culmination of the Tractate. Many tractates end with a message of 'uplift' such as this. Thus many (probably most) modern scholars are of the opinion that our present mishnah is, in fact, a baraita that was tacked on to the tractate after its original end. Our present mishnah (or baraita, if you will) ends with the phrase: 'A song for the uttermost future, for the day that shall be completely Shabbat, rest in life eternal.' This is an obvious attempt to create another uplifting conclusion to the tractate. It is presumably based on the tradition that since a thousand years in Gods sight is just like one day of ours [Psalm 90:4], the divine day is one thousand of our years. Thus, when 6000 years have passed the world will enter into the divine Sabbath, the messianic age. (Accordingly, each divine hour is 41.66 of our years. This explains the messianic fervour that has gripped the kabbalists for the past 400 years; according to this 'calculation' our present year is 'just after 5 pm on Friday' and it is time to light the candles that will usher in the messianic age.

DISCUSSION:

I asked whether anyone knew whether the same priests who officiated at the morning Tamid officiated in the afternoon. Avraham Jacobs writes:

I have a suggestion which might provide an answer whether there were two lotteries for the Tamid. I once heard that the Tamid was really one command, performed in two installments. The unity of the Tamid has also been mentioned by R' S.R. Hirsch in his commentary on Numbers 28 : 4. He mentioned there was also an argument with the Sadducees about the nature of the Tamid. So, two lotteries for the two parts of the Tamid might have been considered at least bad politics. This argument doesn't hold of course for other duties such as trimming the Candelabrum.

I respond:

For what its worth, the Encyclopedia Judaica states that the same priests officiated both morning and afternoon, with the exception of the priests selected to offer the incense. No source is quoted and no explanation is given.


Bayla Singer writes:

You wrote that the priestly blessing is performed only a few times a year (but daily by Chassidim, and daily in Israel generally) because: 'The justification was that when Israel is living the miserable life of an exiled people no one has the necessary joy in their souls to fulfill the divine behest of blessing the people 'in love'.' Yet this is God's blessing, not that of the priests, as you also point out - and since we are commanded to utter a b'racha when hearing of sad news, e.g. the death of a loved one, should we not also acknowledge God's blessing when we are oppressed and exiled? Shouldn't the (presumed) lack of joy in the hearts of the priests be irrelevant to this mitzvah? How can the priests deny God's love and God's 'Name' to the people, even in adversity?

I respond:

I completely agree. And I re-iterate my view that any person who has been told on good authority that he is of priestly descent who does not participate in the ceremony regularly is not acting out of love for his people.


Bill Wiesner writes:

I hope you will forgive a tangential question. The use of the double yod for God's name has always puzzled me. Is it an abbreviation for the tetragrammaton (if so how come 2 yods), is it another name for God? When did it originate? Is it also one of the 'sacred' names?

I respond:

The use of the double yod as a surrogate for the tetragrammaton seems to date back to the middle ages (at least). The handwritten text of a substantial part of Rambams Mishneh Torah which was found in the Cairo Genizah (and which bears Rambams handwritten assurance that the scribes copy 'was checked against my own fair copy') uses the double yod throughout. It is a pious abbreviation, presumably because they did not want to abbreviate to any of the other letters which would spell out part of the divine name. However, this is curious, because throughout the work the scribe (the author?) enumerates 15 and 16 as Yod-He and Yod-Vav, and not the pious circumvention customary nowadays. The double yod is not one of the sacred names: it is a pious surrogate.

This concludes our study of Tractate Tamid.