every day, but only on the first day? The Gemara answers: The days of the festival of Sukkot are distinct from one another with regard to their additional offerings, as the number of bulls offered changes each day of Sukkot (see Numbers 29:12–38). Since each day is unique, the full hallel is recited on each day. By contrast, the days of Passover are not distinct from one another with regard to their additional offerings (see Numbers 28:24), and therefore the full hallel is recited only on the first day, which is the first day on which the additional offerings for a Festival are sacrificed.

The Gemara objects: On Shabbat, which is also distinct from the other days of the week with regard to its additional offerings, let us say hallel. The Gemara explains: Shabbat is not called an appointed day in the Torah, and hallel is recited only on days that are referred to in the Torah as appointed days (see Leviticus 23:4), which are days of rejoicing.

The Gemara objects: On the New Moon, which is called an appointed day, let us say hallel. The Gemara explains: The New Moon is not sanctified with regard to the prohibition against the performance of labor, and hallel is recited only on a day that is sanctified, as it is written: “You shall have a song as in the night when a festival is sanctified” (Isaiah 30:29), which indicates that a night that is sanctified as a Festival, which includes a prohibition of labor, requires song, but one that is not sanctified as a Festival does not require song.

The Gemara objects: On Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur, which are called an appointed day and also are sanctified with regard to the prohibition against the performance of labor, let us say hallel. The Gemara explains: Hallel is not recited on those days due to the statement of Rabbi Abbahu.

As Rabbi Abbahu said that the ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, for what reason do the Jewish people not recite songs of praise, i.e., hallel, before You on Rosh HaShana and on Yom Kippur? He said to them: Is it possible that while the King is sitting on the throne of judgment and the books of life and the books of death are open before Him, the Jewish people would be reciting joyous songs of praise before Me? Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur are somber days of judgment whose mood is incompatible with the recitation of hallel.

The Gemara objects: But what about Hanukkah, which has neither this or that, i.e., there is no special offering on it, nor is labor prohibited, and yet one says hallel. The Gemara explains: Hallel is recited on Hanukkah not because of its status as a Festival, but because of the miracle that occurred on those days. The Gemara objects: If so, on Purim, when there is also this factor, i.e., a miracle occurred on that day, let us say hallel. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Hallel is not recited on Purim because one does not recite a song of praise for a miracle that occurred outside of Eretz Yisrael.

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak objects to this explanation: But there is the exodus from Egypt, which was a miracle that took place outside of Eretz Yisrael, and yet we say hallel on Passover night in commemoration of it? The Gemara responds that this is as it is taught in a baraita: Until the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisrael, all lands were deemed fit for songs of praise to be recited for miracles performed within their borders, as all lands were treated equally. But once the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisrael, that land became endowed with greater sanctity, and all the other lands were no longer deemed fit for songs of praise to be recited for miracles performed within them.

Rav Naḥman says an alternative answer as to why hallel is not recited on Purim: The reading of the Megilla, i.e., the Scroll of Esther, is equivalent to reciting hallel. Rava says a third reason: Granted, hallel is said there, when recalling the exodus from Egypt, as after that salvation one can recite the phrase in hallel: “Give praise, O servants of the Lord” (Psalms 113:1), since after the Israelites’ servitude to Pharaoh ended with their salvation, they were truly servants of the Lord and not servants of Pharaoh. But can it be said here, after the salvation commemorated on Purim: “Give praise, O servants of the Lord,” which would indicate that after the salvation the Jewish people were only servants of the Lord and not servants of Ahasuerus? Not so, as even after the miracle of Purim, we are still the servants of Ahasuerus, since the Jews remained in exile under Persian rule.

The Gemara objects: And according to the opinion of Rav Naḥman, who says that the reading of the Megilla itself is an act of reciting hallel, there is a difficulty: Isn’t it taught in a baraita: Once the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisrael, that land became endowed with greater sanctity, and all the other lands were no longer deemed fit for songs of praise to be recited for miracles performed within them. How, then, may one recite a form of hallel by reading the Megilla? The Gemara answers: He maintains that once the people were exiled from Eretz Yisrael, the other lands returned to their initial suitability, and were once again deemed fit for reciting hallel, in commemoration of miracles performed within them.

§ The mishna teaches: And one would not play a copper flute [abuv]; rather, one would play a flute [abuv] of reed, because its sound is pleasant. The Gemara asks: The mishna opens by referring to flutes and calls them ḥalil and then concludes by referring to playing an abuv. Rav Pappa said: A ḥalil is the same as an abuv. Its original name was abuv; and why does the mishna call it a ḥalil? The reason is that its sound is sweet [ḥali].

The Sages taught in a baraita: There was a flute in the Temple; it was smooth and it was thin, i.e., its sides were thin; it was made from reed, and it was in existence from the days of Moses. The king issued a command and they plated the flute with gold, but then its sound was not as pleasant as it was previously. They therefore removed its plating and its sound was then as pleasant as it was before. Similarly, there was a cymbal in the Temple; it was made from copper and its sound was pleasant. It became damaged and the Sages sent for and brought artisans from Alexandria in Egypt and they repaired it, but its sound was not as pleasant as before. They removed the materials with which the cymbal had been repaired and its sound was then as pleasant as it had been before the repair.

There was a mortar in the Temple; it was made of copper and it was from the days of Moses, and it was used to compound the spices for the incense. It became damaged and they brought artisans from Alexandria in Egypt and they repaired it, but it did not compound the spices as well as it had before. They removed the materials with which the mortar had been repaired and it then compounded the spices as it had before it was repaired.

The baraita concludes: These two copper vessels, the cymbal and the mortar, were remnants from the First Temple and they were damaged and they could not be repaired in an effective manner. And it was with regard to the copper vessels constructed for the First Temple that David said: “All these vessels, which Hiram made for King Solomon, in the House of the Lord, were of burnished brass” (I Kings 7:45), and, in a parallel verse, “bright brass” (II Chronicles 4:16). And with regard to these two items it states in the verse describing the vessels that Ezra brought to Jerusalem: “And vessels of fine golden brass, two, precious as gold” (Ezra 8:27).

Rav and Shmuel disagree as to the meaning of the phrase: Two, precious as gold. One said: Each and every one of these brass vessels was as valuable as two vessels made from gold. And the other one said: The two of them together were as valuable as one vessel made from gold. Similarly, Rav Yosef teaches the following explanation found in a baraita: The two of them together were as valuable as one vessel made from gold.

The Gemara cites another explanation of the verse in Ezra. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Natan says: The cymbals and mortars were pairs, i.e., there were two cymbals and two mortars, as it is stated in the aforementioned verse “two”; do not read it as two [shenayim], but as pairs [sheniyyim].

§ Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel teaches in a baraita: The Siloam pool used to spurt forth water through an opening with a diameter like that of an issar coin.The king issued a command and they widened the opening so that its waters would increase, but the waters actually decreased. And they subsequently decreased the size of the opening again and it once again spurted forth water as it had before. All this serves to uphold that which is stated in the verse: “Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might” (Jeremiah 9:22), i.e., man should not think that he can accomplish anything he wishes.

And likewise Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel would say, with regard to the musical instruments in the Temple: There was no hirdolim in the Temple. The Gemara asks: What is a hirdolim? Abaye said: It is a hydraulic organ. It was not used in the Temple because its sound is pleasant but it disrupts the melody.

Rava bar Sheila said that Rav Mattana said that Shmuel said: There was an instrument called magreifa in the Temple.