The Talmud on the Temple of Onias

b. Menaḥot 109a–b

220–600

About This Entry

According to Josephus’ Jewish Antiquities, Onias IV founded a temple at Leontopolis, in Lower Egypt, with the permission of King Ptolemy VI Philometer in about 145 BCE. He established this rival sanctuary once it was clear that he would never be high priest in Jerusalem, having been usurped by a more Hellenized candidate with Seleucid support. Josephus offers a somewhat different account in The Jewish War, which seems to attribute the building of the temple to Onias III, although the account in Jewish Antiquities is considered more accurate. Onias’ temple likely served a military colony of Jewish troops who fought for Ptolemy, as Onias’ sons served as generals in the Egyptian army. The Leontopolis temple is never mentioned in Judeo-Egyptian sources, including Philo, which suggests that Egyptian Jewry remained committed to and supportive of the Jerusalem Temple over that of Onias. The Onias temple was destroyed by the Romans in 73 CE.

Rabbinic sources display some ambivalence toward the temple of Onias, although they clearly regard the Jerusalem Temple as the proper place of worship. The Mishnah, followed by the Gemara, states that one who vows to offer a sacrifice at the temple of Onias and does so has fulfilled the vow, although it is preferable to offer the sacrifice in Jerusalem. The Mishnah goes on to state that a priest who serves at the temple of Onias is barred from serving at the Jerusalem Temple but may still eat the priestly dues (terumah). A baraita quoted in the Gemara offers two alternative accounts of the temple’s founding, which suggest different answers to the question of whether it was a place of idolatry or worship of God. These accounts mistakenly state that the temple was in Alexandria.

[ONE WHO SAYS:] IT [IS INCUMBENT] UPON ME [TO BRING] A BURNT OFFERING, MUST SACRIFICE IT IN THE TEMPLE [IN JERUSALEM]. AND IF HE SACRIFICED IT IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS, HE HAS NOT FULFILLED [HIS OBLIGATION. ONE WHO SAYS: IT IS INCUMBENT] UPON ME [TO BRING A] BURNT OFFERING THAT I WILL SACRIFICE IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS, MUST SACRIFICE IT IN THE TEMPLE [IN JERUSALEM], BUT IF HE SACRIFICED IT IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS, HE HAS FULFILLED [HIS OBLIGATION]. R. SIMEON SAYS [THAT IF ONE SAYS: IT IS INCUMBENT UPON ME TO BRING A BURNT OFFERING THAT I WILL SACRIFICE IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS], IT IS NOT [CONSECRATED AS] A BURNT OFFERING.

[IF ONE SAYS:] I AM HEREBY A NAZIRITE, [THEN WHEN HIS TERM OF NAZIRITESHIP IS COMPLETED,] HE MUST SHAVE [THE HAIR OF HIS HEAD AND BRING THE REQUISITE OFFERINGS] IN THE TEMPLE [IN JERUSALEM]; AND IF HE SHAVED IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS, HE HAS NOT FULFILLED [HIS OBLIGATION. IF ONE SAYS:] I AM HEREBY A NAZIRITE [PROVIDED] THAT I WILL SHAVE IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS, HE MUST SHAVE IN THE TEMPLE [IN JERUSALEM]; BUT IF HE SHAVED IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS, HE HAS FULFILLED [HIS OBLIGATION]. R. SIMEON SAYS [THAT ONE WHO SAYS: I AM HEREBY A NAZIRITE PROVIDED THAT I WILL SHAVE IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS] IS NOT A NAZIRITE [AT ALL].

[The Mishnah teaches that one who says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a burnt offering that I will sacrifice in the temple of Onias, and sacrifices it in the temple of Onias, has fulfilled his obligation. The Gemara asks: How has he] fulfilled [his obligation? By sacrificing it in the temple of Onias,] hasn’t he [merely] killed it [without sacrificing it properly]?

R. Hamnuna says: [The Mishnah does not mean that he has fulfilled his vow to bring an offering. Rather,] he is rendered like one who says: It [is incumbent] upon me [to bring] a burnt offering on the condition that I will not be responsible for it [if I kill it beforehand].

Rava said to [R. Hamnuna]: If that is so, [what about] the latter clause [of the Mishnah], which teaches [that if one says]: I am hereby a nazirite [provided] that I will shave in the temple of Onias, he must shave in the Temple [in Jerusalem], but if he shaved in the temple of Onias, he has fulfilled [his obligation? In this case do you] also [maintain] that he is rendered like one who says: I am hereby a nazirite on the condition that I will not be responsible for [bringing] its offerings [if I kill them beforehand? Such a condition cannot exempt] a nazirite [from bringing his offerings, because] as long as he does not bring his offerings, he is not fit [to conclude his term of naziriteship and is still bound by all of the restrictions of a nazirite].

Rather, Rava said [there is a different explanation: The animal was never consecrated at all, as] this person intended [merely] to [bring the animal as] a gift, [but not to consecrate it as an offering. He presumably lives closer to the temple of Onias than to the Temple in Jerusalem, and must have] said [to himself]: If it is sufficient [to sacrifice this animal] in the temple of Onias, I [am prepared to] exert [myself and bring it. But if it is necessary to do] more [than that, i.e., to bring it to Jerusalem], I am not able to afflict myself.

[This is the explanation of the latter clause of the Mishnah] as well: [If one said that he would be] a nazirite [provided that he will shave in the temple of Onias], this man [did not intend to accept upon himself the halakhic status of naziriteship. Rather, he merely] intends to practice abstinence [by not drinking wine, along with observing the other restrictions of a nazirite. Therefore,] he said [to himself]: If it is sufficient [to shave] in the temple of Onias, I [am prepared to] exert [myself and do so. But if it is necessary to do] more [than that, i.e., to go to Jerusalem to shave and bring the required offerings], I am not able to afflict myself.

And R. Hamnuna [could have] said to you [in response to Rava’s challenge: With regard to the case of one who vowed to become] a nazirite [on the condition that he would shave and bring his offerings in the temple of Onias, the interpretation of the Mishnah is] as you said. [But with regard to one who vows to bring] a burnt offering [in the temple of Onias, his intent is as I explained, and it is as if] he says: [It is incumbent] upon me [to bring] a burnt offering on the condition that I will not be responsible for it [if I kill it beforehand].

And R. Yoḥanan also [holds in accordance with] that which R. Hamnuna [said,] as Rabba bar Bar Ḥana said [that] R. Yoḥanan said [that if one says]: It [is incumbent] upon me [to bring] a burnt offering [on the condition] that I will sacrifice it in the temple of Onias, and he sacrificed it in Erets Yisrael [but not in the Temple], he has fulfilled [his obligation], but [his actions] are [also] punishable by excision from the world to come [because he sacrificed an offering outside the Temple. This is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Hamnuna that the animal is consecrated]. [ . . . ]

THE PRIESTS WHO SERVED IN THE TEMPLE OF ONIAS MAY NOT SERVE IN THE TEMPLE IN JERUSALEM; AND NEEDLESS TO SAY, [IF THEY SERVED] FOR SOMETHING ELSE, [A EUPHEMISM FOR IDOLATRY, THEY ARE DISQUALIFIED FROM SERVICE IN THE TEMPLE]. AS IT IS STATED: NEVERTHELESS THE PRIESTS OF THE PRIVATE ALTARS DID NOT COME UP TO THE ALTAR OF THE LORD IN JERUSALEM, BUT THEY DID EAT MATZAH AMONG THEIR BRETHREN (2 KINGS 23:9). [THE HALAKHIC STATUS OF] THESE [PRIESTS IS] LIKE [THAT OF] BLEMISHED [PRIESTS IN THAT] THEY RECEIVE A SHARE [IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE MEAT OF THE OFFERINGS] AND PARTAKE [OF THAT MEAT], BUT THEY DO NOT SACRIFICE [OFFERINGS OR PERFORM ANY OF THE SACRIFICIAL RITES]. [ . . . ]

[The Mishnah teaches:] And needless to say, [if priests served for] something else, [they are disqualified from service in the Temple. The Gemara comments:] From [the fact] that it says: Needless to say, [if they served for] something else, by inference, the temple of Onias is not [a temple of] idol worship, [but rather a temple devoted to the worship of God].

It is taught [in a baraita] like the one who says [that] the temple of Onias is not [a temple of] idol worship. As it is taught: [During] the year in which Simon the Just died, he said to [his associates], “This year, he will die [referring to himself].” They said to him, “From where do you know?” [ . . . ]

At the time of his death, he said to [the sages], “Onias, my son, will serve [as high priest] in my stead.” Shimi, [Onias’] brother, became jealous [of him], as [Shimi] was two and a half years older than [Onias. Shimi] said to [Onias treacherously], “Come and I will teach you the order of the service [of the high priest.” Shimi] dressed [Onias] in a tunic and girded him with a ribbon [as a belt, i.e., not in the vestments of the high priest, and] stood him next to the altar. [Shimi] said to his fellow priests, “Look what this [man] vowed and fulfilled for his beloved, [that he had said to her]: On the day that I serve in the high priesthood I will wear your tunic and gird your ribbon.”

The fellow priests of [Onias] wanted to kill him [because he had disgraced the Temple service with his garments. Onias] ran [away] from them and they ran after him. He went to Alexandria in Egypt and built an altar there and sacrificed [offerings] upon it for the sake of idol worship. When the sages heard of the matter they said: If this [person, Shimi], who did not enter [the position of high priest, acted with] such [jealousy], all the more so [will] one who enters [a prestigious position rebel if that position is taken away from him. This is] the statement of R. Meir.

R. Judah said to him: [The] incident was not like this. Rather, Onias did not accept [the position of high priest] because his brother Shimi was two and a half years older than him, [so Shimi was appointed as high priest]. And even so, Onias was jealous of his brother Shimi. [Onias] said to [Shimi], “Come and I will teach you the order of the service [of the high priest].” And [Onias] dressed [Shimi] in a tunic and girded him in a ribbon and stood him next to the altar. [Onias] said to his fellow priests, “Look what this [man, Shimi,] vowed and fulfilled for his beloved, [that he had said to her]: On the day that I serve in the high priesthood I will wear your tunic and gird your ribbon.”

His fellow priests wanted to kill [Shimi. Shimi then] told them the entire incident, [that he had been tricked by his brother Onias, so the priests] wanted to kill Onias. [Onias] ran [away] from them, and they ran after him. [Onias] ran to the palace of the king, and they ran after him. Anyone who saw him would say, “This is him, this is him,” [and he was not able to escape unnoticed. Onias] went to Alexandria in Egypt and built an altar there and sacrificed [offerings] upon it for the sake of Heaven. As it is stated: In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at its border, to the Lord (Isaiah 19:19).

And when the sages heard of the matter they said: If this one, [Onias,] who fled from [the position of high priest and offered it to his brother, still was overcome with] such [jealousy to the point where he tried to have Shimi killed], all the more so [will] one who wants to enter [a prestigious position be jealous of the one who already has that position].

Translation adapted from the Noé Edition of the Koren Talmud Bavli.

Notes

Words in brackets appear in the original translation.

Credits

From Koren Talmud Bavli, Noé Edition, trans. Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz (Jerusalem: Koren Publishers Jerusalem, 2019). Accessed via the William Davidson digital edition, sefaria.org. Adapted with permission of Koren Publishers Ltd.

Published in: The Posen Library of Jewish Culture and Civilization, vol. 2: Emerging Judaism.