the nobles of [ḥorei] Judea saw what had occurred, they went up to the top of their roofs and fell and died. This is as it is written: "The burden concerning the Valley of Vision. What ails you now, that you have wholly gone up to the housetops, you that are full of uproar, a tumultuous city, a joyous town? Your slain are not slain with the sword, nor dead in battle" (Isaiah 22:1-2). Isaiah prophesies about Jerusalem, the Valley of Vision, which will be conquered by Nebuchadnezzar, crying: What ails you, Jerusalem, that your nobles will go up to the rooftops and fall to their deaths? Your dead will not be slain with the sword or in battle; they will die by falling from the rooftops.

Halakha 3 · MISHNA This mishna details the exact location and purpose of the thirteen tables in the Temple. There were thirteen tables in the Temple. Eight of them were made of marble and were located in the slaughtering area, north of the altar, where the priests would slaughter the offerings of the most sacred order. Upon these tables they would wash the innards of the offerings, as the marble was cool and preserved the freshness of the meat. And there were two more tables on the western side of the ramp, south of the altar, one of marble and one of silver.On the table of marble they would place the limbs before they were sacrificed, and from there the priests would bring them up to the altar. On the table made of silver they would place the ninety-three sacred vessels brought out from the Chamber of Vessels each morning for the services of that day. And there were two tables in the Entrance Hall to the Sanctuary, on the inside of the Entrance Hall, near the opening to the Temple, one of marble and one of gold. On the table of marble they would put the shewbread before its entrance to the Sanctuary after it was baked on the eve of Shabbat. And they would place the old shewbread on the table of gold upon its exit from the Sanctuary, to be divided among the priests. The reason the shewbread was placed on a marble table before being brought into the Sanctuary and on a golden one upon when removed from there is that one elevates to a higher level in matters of sanctity and one does not downgrade. Since it had been placed on the golden Shewbread table all week inside the Sanctuary, upon its removal it could not be derogated to a marble table and so was placed on a different golden table in the Entrance Hall. Finally, there was one table of gold inside the Sanctuary, i.e. the Shewbread table, upon which the shewbread was placed always.

GEMARA: The mishna stated that the shewbread was placed on a marble table when it was brought into the Sanctuary. The Gemara cites a different opinion: As it was taught in a baraita: When the shewbread was brought into the sanctuary it was placed on a table of silver. In accordance with the opinion stated in the mishna, that the bread was placed on a marble table, Rabbi Yosei said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak, who said that Rabbi Ḥananya cites this tradition in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: There was no table of silver here, as it boils, i.e., it heats articles placed upon it, which could cause the shewbread to grow moldy. The Gemara raises a difficulty: Wasn't it taught in a baraita as follows: This was one of the miracles that were performed in the Temple, that just as they would place the shewbread hot as it came out of the oven, so too they would remove it hot, as it is stated: "To put hot bread in the day when it was taken away" (I Samuel 21:7). When they removed the shewbread after seven days on the golden table, it was as hot as it was when they originally placed it there. Why, then, were they concerned about placing the shewbread on a silver table, if it would remain warm in any event? The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One does not mention miraculous events. Despite the fact that miracles occur, one should not rely on them, but rather act according to the laws of nature. Therefore the priests did not place the bread on a silver table that could have spoiled the shewbread through natural causes. They raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ila: If one week there was no new bread to replace the old bread on the shewbread table, what is the halakha with regard to leaving the old shewbread until the next Shabbat? On the one hand, as the time has arrived for the bread to be removed and divided among the priests, if it remains after this time it could be considered notar, left over, and disqualified by remaining overnight. On the other hand, as there is no new bread to replace it, perhaps this bread would still be considered the shewbread of the table and would not be disqualified until new bread would be brought. Rabbi Ila said to them that it is written: "And you shall set upon the table shewbread before Me always" (Exodus 25:30). There should always be shewbread on the table, even if it is disqualified.

The Gemara cites a baraita that discusses the shewbread table: Solomon built ten tables for the Temple, modeled after the shewbread table. As it is written: "He made also ten tables, and placed them in the Temple, five on the right side and five on the left" (II Chronicles 4:8). The Gemara asks: If you say that right and left refer to the sides of the entrance to the Sanctuary, which means that Solomon set up five tables in the southern side of the Sanctuary to the left of its entrance, and five in the northern side of the Sanctuary to the right, this is difficult. The Gemara explains the difficulty: Isn't the table fit only if it is in the northern part of the Sanctuary, as it is stated: "And you shall put the table on the north side" (Exodus 26:35)? If so, what is the meaning when the verse states: "Five on the right side and five on the left"? Rather, it must mean that the table prepared by Moses was positioned in the proper place in the Sanctuary, and five of the tables made by Solomon were placed to the right of the table of Moses, and five to its left. Even so, despite the fact that there were so many tables in the Sanctuary, the priest would arrange the shewbread only on the table of Moses alone, as it is stated: "And Solomon made all the vessels that were in the House of the Lord, the golden altar, and the table whereupon the shewbread was, of gold" (I Kings 7:48). The use of the definite article "the" to describe the table indicates that there was one unique table upon which the shewbread was arranged, the table of Moses. Conversely, Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: He would arrange the shewbread on all of the tables, each one in turn, as it is stated: "And the tables upon which was the shewbread" (II Chronicles 4:19). This verse indicates that the shewbread was placed on all the tables. The Gemara continues to discuss the shewbread table. It was taught in a baraita: All the tables, both of Moses and Solomon, were positioned from east to west, in the northern part of the Sanctuary, so that their length ran parallel to the length of the Sanctuary. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: They were placed from north to south, and their length was to the width of the Sanctuary. According to the one who said that the tables were placed from east to west it works out well, as they are all suitable for service. The tables were positioned in a manner that rendered them all fit for service, as the table could be used only in the northern part of the Sanctuary, in accordance with the verse: "And you shall put the table on the north side" (Exodus 26:35). However, according to the one who said that they were placed from north to south, the table, i.e., five of the tables, are found in the southern part of the Sanctuary,