A recent Jewish Link article by Rabbi Haim Jachter (No Skipping: ‘Eizehu Mekoman Shel Zevachim!’, May 9, 2024) promoted the daily recitation of the fifth perek of Mishnayot Zevachim, beginning with “Eizehu Mekoman,”and therefore opposed some prominent yeshiva’s practice of skipping it. He details positive aspects of this chapter, such as a unique lack of dispute, and desired results that emerge from its recitation, such as possibly fulfilling a Biblical requirement. How could anyone oppose its daily recitation? As a frequent skipper myself, I’ve decided to take up the less frum-sounding side, and explain why skipping may actually be a good thing.
Basis of Recital
Let us begin with the basis for this custom. A midrash (Taanit 27b, Megillah 31b) describes a conversation at the Brit Bein HaBetarim. Hashem reassures Avraham that He won’t destroy the Jewish people, and that even if they sin, the Temple sacrifice will atone for them. Avraham asks what would work for them after the Temple’s destruction, and Hashem tells him, “I’ve already enacted for them the Seder HaKorbanot,” the order of the sacrifices. כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁקּוֹרְאִין בָּהֶן מַעֲלֶה אֲנִי עֲלֵיהֶן כְּאִילּוּ מַקְרִיבִין לְפָנַי קׇרְבָּן, וּמוֹחֵל אֲנִי עַל כׇּל עֲוֹנוֹתֵיהֶם. “Any time they read them, I will reckon it as if they sacrificed the korban before me, and I will forgive them for all their sins.” This midrash appears in the context of the importance of ma’amadot, non-kohanic groups who would recite daily selections from the beginning of Bereishit alongside the offering of the Temple sacrifices. I might have interpreted Seder HaKorbanot as the daily recital of those same Bereishit texts even after the Temple’s destruction, but the common assumption is that this is a recital of the Biblical texts detailing the offerings.
That only serves as the basis for recital of the Biblical text of the Korban HaTamid, but not the Mishnaic chapter of “Eizehu Mekoman.” In Menachot 110a, Rabbi Yochanan interprets a verse in Tehillim (about standing in the Temple at night) as stating that when Torah scholars study Torah at night, it is as if they are engaged in the Temple service. He interprets a verse in Divrei Hayamim (“an ordinance for Israel forever”) to mean that when Torah scholars engage in studying the Temple service, it is as if the Temple was built in their days (and perhaps they are serving in it). This Gemara does not imply a daily obligation or even exemplary behavior of Torah scholars (and certainly not the entire Jewish people) to deeply study, or even mindlessly recite, the Mishnaic discussion of the korbanot, but it may serve as a basis for a later-established practice.
In Kiddushin 30a, Rav Safra quotes the Tanna, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananya, who rereads וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ as וְשִׁלַּשְׁתָּם, that you should divide your Torah study in thirds. Therefore, one should devote ⅓ to Scripture, ⅓ to Mishnah, and ⅓ to Talmud. Tosafot understand this as a threefold study each and every day, and point to the Seder (Siddur) of Rav Amram Gaon (died 875 CE) which establishes like their custom (כמו שאנו נוהגים) to recite Mikra (namely from Tzav), Mishna (namely “Eizehu Mekoman”, and Gemara (namely the Brayta of Rabbi Yishmael). Tosafot also cite Rabbeinu Tam, who maintains that study of Gemara counts because it encompasses all three.
Regarding reciting the hermeneutical rules of Rabbi Yishmael, this counts as Talmud because it is a midrash. It is relevant to the korbanot because it appears at the start of the Sifra, the midrash on Sefer Vayikra. (See Tur, Orach Chaim 50.) Thus, much of this recitation appears post-Talmudic, the practice is fairly early – Geonic.
What Counts as Studying?
Rabbi Yochanan discussed specifically Torah scholars and specifically studying the sacrificial laws; he didn’t have daily recitation in mind. The Kol Bo (2:5) writes ונהגו לומר ולשנות פר׳ אי זהו מקומן, because of Rabbi Yochanan’s first statement, thus mentioning both “reciting” and “studying.”The Tur also mentions studying, וקבעו לשנות משנת איזהו מקומן.
This לשנות is not just the verb applicable to Mishnaic texts, but implies actual understanding and contemplation. Aruch HaShulchan (siman 50) writes regarding this, “and he needs to understand that which he studies, for if not, this is not study.” Similarly, Magen Avraham (50:2), commenting on Shulchan Aruch stating “so that they merit studying each day,” writes, “it seems to me that this was particularly in their day, since they understood the language of Targum (Aramaic). But nowadays, when they don’t automatically understand, they need to study to the extent of understanding. For if not so, it is not considered understanding.”
There’s a famous joke, poking fun at the simplifying assumptions in theoretical physics: Milk production at a dairy farm was low, so the farmer wrote to the local university, asking for help from academia. A multidisciplinary team of professors was assembled, headed by a theoretical physicist, and two weeks of intensive on-site investigation took place. The scholars then returned to the university, notebooks crammed with data, where the task of writing the report was left to the team leader. Shortly thereafter the physicist returned to the farm, saying to the farmer, “I have the solution, but it works only in the case of spherical cows in a vacuum.”
In similar fashion, Shulchan Aruch might state a halacha about daily prayer, but that describes a spherical congregant in a vacuum. In the real world, in a yeshiva or a shul, how is “Eizehu Mekoman ‘’ recited? Do congregants / yeshiva students sit with a diagram of the Temple and altar, slowly studying the perek with Rav Ovadia miBartenura’s commentary? Stop an American layman or Torah scholar ten seconds after his recital, and ask: “On what corner of the altar did they pour the remaining blood of the chatat offering?” Or ask a Torah scholar, who has been reciting / “studying” this for 20 years. What percentage could answer correctly without second thought? If it isn’t real study, then it might indeed be bittul Torah!
Indeed, in your typical shul where they recite it, the congregants are rushing to get to work. All of tefillah might be 30 minutes. In a yeshiva, there is breakfast and the first seder or shiur, so there are similar time constraints. In some shuls at which I have davened, there is someone with a stopwatch, so that each section of tefillah is reached at the expected time, like clockwork. I’ve been told by some gabbaim that it doesn’t matter that I say every word, but that I can skip some words,as long as I read aloud the ending sentence at the proper time, so that they can progress. I suspect that many a shaliach tzibbur has done just this, because I cannot even make my mouth form the words at the speed they are purportedly going. If they are, they speak and understand as fast as a native Israeli, and are as adept at fast speech as an auctioneer. I don’t believe that this is the type of recital with contemplation that can count as study.
Reasons to Skip
Other parts of tefillah have historically been modified because of pragmatic concerns. Consider the daily recital of the ketoret ingredients, where omitting an ingredient in the actual ketoret would incur מיתה בידי שמים, so we only say it on Shabbat (and still rush through)! If “Eizehu Mekoman ‘’ doesn’t add value and is bittul Torah, perhaps we should similarly eliminate it.
Assuming we rule like Tosafot and wish to represent each third of Torah study each day, we have accomplished that immediately after Birkat HaTorah by reciting “Yevarecha” (Scripture), “Elu Devarim” (Mishnah) and the second” Elu Devarim “(a Brayta in the Gemara). The Seder of Rav Amram Gaon only has “Yevarecha,”then transitions to the Korbanot. We’ve checked off those boxes, so the lengthy recital adds nothing.
The original Talmudic Shacharit prayer was much shorter, consisting of Shema with its blessings and the Amidah. The morning blessings were recited at home. Aleinu wasn’t recited. The recitation of Ashrei and Psukei deZimra was a praiseworthy optional practice, and post-Talmudically, they established it more permanently and instituted blessings before and after. Tachanun was an optional freeform prayer, in contrast to the fixed Amida. Over centuries, extra texts have accrued to this daily prayer. For each, a rabbi could compose an eloquent article as to its worth and why we should not skip it.
Yet, time, focus and patience are finite resources, and something’s gotta give. As the Tur writes (Orach Chaim 1), “whether one says a lot or a little, so long as he directs his heart in his supplications, for a little with intent is preferable to a lot without intent.” In shiur, Rav Herschel Schachter recommended a practice in shuls in which one cannot reasonably say the long Tachanun with focus — to divide it in thirds, and each Monday and Thursday say the next third. As a personal practice, I daven Psukei deZimra slower and understand what I’m saying, at the expense of “Eizehu Mekoman.” I like that the congregation recites it, since it provides me with extra time. I wonder if a tzibbur might similarly make a communal choice.
Rabbi Dr. Joshua Waxman teaches computer science at Stern College for Women, and his research includes programmatically finding scholars and scholastic relationships in the Babylonian Talmud.
