In the 24th and final chapter of 2 Samuel, God becomes angry with the people of Israel and commands King David to take a census of the people. The source of God’s anger is not fully clear and, you might also wonder why a census is punishment. A clue may be found in the book of Exodus. Soon after the giving of the Torah at Sinai, God commands Moses to take a census of the people, and says: “When you take a census of the Israelites according to their army enrollment, each shall pay God a ransom for himself on being enrolled, that no plague may come upon them through their being enrolled.” (Exodus 30:12) There, Rashi explains that things that have been counted are subject to the influence of the evil eye. Taking a census, in other words, is dangerous.
In Exodus, to avoid the dangers of being counted, the Israelites each turn in a half-shekel coin and the money is counted, instead of the people. In 2 Samuel, David, perhaps recklessly, orders his census bureau to count the people directly. Indeed, after the census is complete, a plague kills many. Given God’s anger at the people, this was likely the intended result.
What does any of this have to do with the current talmudic discussion about sacrifices? On today’s daf, the Talmud is talking about whether the wood that is used to burn sacrifices on the altar is provided by those who are bringing sacrifices or from communal funds. A beraita brings two answers:
Just as the altar was built from communal funds, so too, the wood and fire are brought from communal supplies. This is the statement of Rabbi Elazar bar Rabbi Shimon.
Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua says: Just as the altar was not used by an ordinary person, as it was built for the purpose of serving as an altar for God, so too, the wood and fire should not have been used previously by an ordinary person.
Both responses imply that the wood is provided through communal funds. Rabbi Elazar ben Shimon says so directly; Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua says that the wood should not have been used by an ordinary person, implying that its source must be communal. Given the similarity between these two positions, the Gemara identifies the difference between them:
The difference between the two is whether there is a requirement that the wood be new.
According to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar bar Rabbi Shimon, the wood is fit provided that it comes from communal supplies, even if it is not new wood, whereas according to Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua it must be new wood. This is where we return to 2 Samuel. After the plague subsides, David feels guilty for not having protected the people during the census. As part of his repentance, he is commanded by Gad the prophet to set up an altar on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite and offer sacrifices there. Araunah offers to provide David with oxen for his sacrifice and the wood from their equipment upon which to offer them. This detail appears to establish precedent that wood that has already been used can be sanctified and burnt on an altar — a challenge to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua. Not so fast, replies the Gemara, who is to say that the equipment is used? It’s also possible that Araunah’s equipment was brand new and that is why it was acceptable for David to make use of it in his sacrifice.
The narrative of 2 Samuel 24 is about many things, but not obviously written to establish norms for the ritual practices in the Temple. After all, it calls for an altar on a private citizen’s threshing floor. Yet, for the rabbis of the Talmud, every verse of Bible is a cornucopia of meaning, just waiting to be harvested. So there is nothing odd about using this story to learn about sacrifices in the Temple.
Read all of Menachot 22 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on February 2, 2026. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.
