Sukkah, Daf Nun Aleph, Part 1

 

Introduction

The Talmud returns to discussing whether the main aspect of Temple music was the vocal singing or the musical instruments.

 

אמר רב פפא: כתנאי דתנן עבדי כהנים היו, דברי רבי מאיר. רבי יוסי אומר: משפחת בית הפגרים ומשפחת בית צפריא, ומאמאום היו, שהיו משיאין לכהונה. רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס אומר; לוים היו.

מאי לאו בהא קא מיפלגי; דמאן דאמר עבדים היו, קסבר: עיקר שירה בפה, ומאן דאמר לוים היו, קסבר: עיקר שירה בכלי.

 

R. Papa said: This dispute is like the one between the following Tannas as we have learned: [The flute players in the Temple] were the slaves of the priests, the words of R. Meir.

R. Yose says: They were the families of Beth Ha-Pegarim, and Beth Zipporia who hailed from Emmaus and were married into the priestly stock.

R. Hanina b. Antigonus says: They were Levites.

Now do they not differ on the following principles: He who says that they were slaves is of the opinion that the essential feature of the [Temple] music was the vocal singing, while he who says that they were Levites holds the opinion that the essential feature of the [Temple] music was the instrument?

 

R. Papa says that the dispute concerning whether the essential element of the Temple music was with an instrument or by voice is related to a dispute over whether the flute players in the Temple were slaves owned by priests or whether they were Levites. This dispute is found in Mishnah Arakhin 2:4. R. Meir says they were slaves because he holds that the main aspect of the Temple music was the singing. Therefore, the flutes could be played by the slaves, those of lower status.

In contrast, R. Hanina b. Antigonus holds that they were Levites. Since the main feature of the Temple music was the musical instrument, the flutes had to be played by Levites, those of higher status.

 

ותסברא, רבי יוסי מאי קסבר? אי קסבר עיקר שירה בפה – אפילו עבדים נמי.

אי קסבר עיקר שירה בכלי, לוים – אין, ישראלים – לא!

 

But do you really think this? What then does R. Yose really hold? If he is of the opinion that the essential feature of the [Temple] music was the singing, then even slaves [should be allowed to play the instruments], and if he is of the opinion that the essential feature was the instrument, then only Levites should [be allowed to play] but not Israelites?

 

The problem with R. Papa’s explanation of this mishnah is that it does not take into account R. Yose’s opinion from the mishnah– men from respectable families, but not Levites would play the flute. The problem is that this opinion does not accord with the scheme that R. Papa set up. If the main feature of Temple music was by voice, then why not let slaves play the flute? And if it was through an instrument, then he should demand that Levites play the flute.

 

אלא: דכולי עלמא עיקר שירה בפה, ובהא קא מיפלגי; דמר סבר: הכי הוה מעשה, ומר סבר: הכי הוה מעשה.

 

Rather all agree that the essential feature of the [Temple] music was the vocal singing, but it is on this that they differ: One Master holds this was how it was done while the other Master holds that this was how it was done.

 

Having rejected R. Papa’s explanation, the Talmud says that the tannaim merely differed as to their historical recollections of who actually played the flute. Some say it was Levites, some say it was men of important families, and some say that the flutes were played by slaves. But they all agree that the essential element of the music in the Temple was by voice.

 

למאי נפקא מינה? – למעלין מדוכן ליוחסין ולמעשר קא מיפלגי. מאן דאמר עבדים היו, קסבר: אין מעלין מדוכן ליוחסין, ולא למעשר. ומאן דאמר ישראל היו, קסבר: מעלין מדוכן ליוחסין, אבל לא למעשר. ומאן דאמר לוים היו, קסבר: מעלין מדוכן, בין ליוחסין בין למעשר.

 

So then what does this matter?

To elevate a man who had sung on the platform for matters of genealogy and tithes.

He who says that they were slaves holds that we don’t elevate from the platform to genealogy; he who says that they were Israelites [from good families] holds that we that we do elevate from the platform for matters of genealogy, but not for tithes; while he who says that they were Levites holds that we do elevate from the platform for matters of genealogy and tithes.

 

To just say that the sages disagree about how things were done is not a satisfactory explanation of the mishnah, for it does not explain why the tannaim (or the editors of the Mishnah) would bother remembering such details. There must be some reason why this mishnah was remembered.

The answer is that it is connected to the question of what we can assume about a person who played the flute on the platform in the Temple was he from a good Israelite family, was he a Levite, or might he have been a slave?

According to the one who holds that they were slaves, having sung on the platform is not evidence of being from a good family. Such a person would not even be allowed to marry an Israelite woman.

According to the one who holds that they were Israelites from good families, he would be allowed to marry a woman from a good family, but he would not be allowed to receive tithes because he was not a Levite.

Finally, the one who holds that these men were Levites would hold that any man known to have played the flute on the platform would be allowed to marry into a good Israelite family and he would be allowed to receive tithes. Such a man would be assumed to be a Levite.