Yoma 68b

לִצְפוֹנָהּ שֶׁל יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, וְחוּץ לְשָׁלֹשׁ מַחֲנוֹת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אַבֵּית הַדֶּשֶׁן נִשְׂרָפִין.

North of Jerusalem, and outside of three camps. Rabbi Yosei says: They are burned in the place of the ashes.

אָמַר רָבָא: מַאן תְּנָא דִּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי — רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב הוּא. דְּתַנְיָא: ״אֶל שֶׁפֶךְ הַדֶּשֶׁן יִשָּׂרֵף״, שֶׁיְּהֵא לְשֵׁם דֶּשֶׁן, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: שֶׁיְּהֵא מְקוֹמוֹ מְשׁוּפָּךְ.

Rava said: Who is the tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Yosei on this issue? It is Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, as it was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “Where the ashes are poured out [ shefekh hadeshen ] shall it be burned” (Leviticus 4:12), which means that there shall already be ash there in that place, so that it is known as the ash heap even before this animal is burned there. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: This verse indicates that its place should be slanted [ meshupakh ] so that ash that is deposited there will roll downhill. Rava understood that whereas Rabbi Yosei requires that there already be ash present when the bull is burned, Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov does not.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: וְדִילְמָא בִּמְקוֹמוֹ מְשׁוּפָּךְ הוּא דִּפְלִיגִי.

Abaye said to him: There is no proof from here, as perhaps they disagree only about whether the place must be slanted. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov may agree there should be ash there to begin with, but he adds that the place must also be slanted. Therefore, there is no proof to support Rava’s statement.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְהַשּׂוֹרֵף״ — הַשּׂוֹרֵף מְטַמֵּא בְּגָדִים וְלֹא הַמַּצִּית אֶת הָאוּר וְלֹא הַמְסַדֵּר אֶת הַמַּעֲרָכָה. וְאֵי זֶהוּ הַשּׂוֹרֵף? זֶה הַמְסַיֵּיעַ בִּשְׁעַת שְׂרֵיפָה.

The Sages taught: It states: “And he who burns them shall wash his garments” (Leviticus 16:28), to indicate that only the garments of the one who burns the bull and goat of Yom Kippur are rendered impure, but not the garments of the one who kindles the fire, and not the garments of the one who arranges the pile of wood. And who is the one who burns? It is the one who assists at the actual time of burning.

יָכוֹל אַף מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשׂוּ אֵפֶר מְטַמְּאִין בְּגָדִים — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אוֹתָם״, אוֹתָם מְטַמְּאִין בְּגָדִים, וְלֹא מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשׂוּ אֵפֶר מְטַמְּאִין בְּגָדִים. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: הַפָּר מְטַמֵּא, נִיתַּךְ הַבָּשָׂר אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא בְּגָדִים.

One might have thought that garments would be rendered impure even after the bull and goat have become ash. Therefore, the verse states: Them, to indicate that they themselves, the bull and goat of Yom Kippur, render garments impure, but they do not render garments impure once they become ash. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: The bull causes ritual impurity before it is burned, but once the flesh is burned it no longer renders garments impure.

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ דְּשַׁוְּיֵהּ חֲרוֹכָא.

The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between the opinion of the first tanna and the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them when he turned it into a charred mass and the form of the animal has already become distorted but has not actually become ash. According to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, it no longer causes impurity.

מַתְנִי׳ אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל: הִגִּיעַ שָׂעִיר לַמִּדְבָּר. וּמִנַּיִין הָיוּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁהִגִּיעַ שָׂעִיר לַמִּדְבָּר? דִּירְכָּאוֹת הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין וּמְנִיפִין בְּסוּדָרִין. וְיוֹדְעִין שֶׁהִגִּיעַ שָׂעִיר לַמִּדְבָּר.

MISHNA: They said to the High Priest: The goat has reached the wilderness. And how did they know in the Temple that the goat reached the wilderness? They would build platforms [ dirkaot ] all along the way and people would stand on them and wave scarves [ sudarin ] to signal when the goat arrived. And therefore they knew that the goat reached the wilderness.

אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וַהֲלֹא סִימָן גָּדוֹל הָיָה לָהֶם: מִירוּשָׁלַיִם וְעַד בֵּית חֲדוֹדוֹ, שְׁלֹשָׁה מִילִין, הוֹלְכִין מִיל וְחוֹזְרִין מִיל, וְשׁוֹהִין כְּדֵי מִיל וְיוֹדְעִין שֶׁהִגִּיעַ שָׂעִיר לַמִּדְבָּר.

Rabbi Yehuda said: Why did they need these platforms? Didn’t they already have a reliable indicator? From Jerusalem to Beit Ḥiddudo, the edge of the wilderness, where the mitzva of dispatching the goat was performed, was a distance of three mil . Since the nobles of Jerusalem walked a mil to escort the dispatcher and returned a mil , and waited the time equivalent to the time it takes to walk a mil , they knew that the goat reached the wilderness. There was no need for the platforms.

רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: וַהֲלֹא סִימָן אַחֵר הָיָה לָהֶם: לָשׁוֹן שֶׁל זְהוֹרִית הָיָה קָשׁוּר עַל פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל, וּכְשֶׁהִגִּיעַ שָׂעִיר לַמִּדְבָּר הָיָה הַלָּשׁוֹן מַלְבִּין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אִם יִהְיוּ חֲטָאֵיכֶם כַּשָּׁנִים כַּשֶּׁלֶג יַלְבִּינוּ״.

Rabbi Yishmael says: Didn’t they have a different indicator? There was a strip of crimson tied to the entrance to the Sanctuary, and when the goat reached the wilderness and the mitzva was fulfilled the strip would turn white, as it is stated: “Though your sins be as scarlet, they will become white as snow” (Isaiah 1:18).

גְּמָ׳ אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ בֵּית חֲדוֹדוֹ בַּמִּדְבָּר קָיְימָא, וְהָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּקָסָבַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ שָׂעִיר לַמִּדְבָּר — נַעֲשֵׂית מִצְוָתוֹ.

GEMARA: Abaye said: Learn from this that Beit Ḥiddudo is located in the wilderness, and this comes to teach us that Rabbi Yehuda holds that once the goat has reached the wilderness, its mitzva is complete even before it is pushed off the cliff, and there is no need to wait any longer.

הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ שְׁנֵי שְׂעִירֵי

MISHNA: The High Priest came to read the Torah. If he wished to read the Torah while still dressed in the fine linen garments, i.e., the priestly vestments he wore during the previous service, he may read wearing them; and if not he is permitted to read in a white robe of his own, which is not a priestly vestment.

בָּא לוֹ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל לִקְרוֹת, אִם רָצָה לִקְרוֹת בְּבִגְדֵי בוּץ — קוֹרֵא, וְאִם לָאו — קוֹרֵא בְּאִצְטְלִית לָבָן מִשֶּׁלּוֹ.

The synagogue attendant takes a Torah scroll and gives it to the head of the synagogue that stood on the Temple Mount; and the head of the synagogue gives it to the deputy High Priest, and the Deputy gives it to the High Priest, and the High Priest stands and receives the scroll from his hands. And he reads from the scroll the Torah portion beginning with the verse: “After the death” (Leviticus 16:1) and the portion beginning with the verse: “But on the tenth” (Leviticus 23:26), and furls the Torah scroll and places it on his bosom and says: More than what I have read before you is written here. The Torah portion beginning with the verse: “And on the tenth,” from the book of Numbers (29:7), he then reads by heart.

חַזַּן הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹטֵל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה, וְנוֹתְנוֹ לְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת, וְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹתְנוֹ לַסְּגָן, וְהַסְּגָן נוֹתְנוֹ לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עוֹמֵד וּמְקַבֵּל, וְקוֹרֵא בְּ״אַחֲרֵי מוֹת״ וְ״אַךְ בֶּעָשׂוֹר״, וְגוֹלֵל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וּמַנִּיחוֹ בְּחֵיקוֹ וְאוֹמֵר: יוֹתֵר מִמַּה שֶּׁקָּרָאתִי לִפְנֵיכֶם כָּתוּב כָּאן. ״וּבֶעָשׂוֹר״ שֶׁבְּחוֹמֶשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים קוֹרֵא עַל פֶּה.

And he recites after the reading the following eight blessings: Concerning the Torah: Who has given us the Torah of truth; and concerning the Temple service: Find favor in Your people Israel and accept the service in Your most holy House... for You alone do we serve with reverence; and concerning thanksgiving: We give thanks to You; and concerning pardon of iniquity: Pardon our iniquities on this Yom Kippur; and concerning the Temple in and of itself, which concludes: Blessed…Who chose the Temple; and concerning the Jewish People in and of itself, which concludes: Blessed…Who chose Israel; and concerning Jerusalem in and of itself, which concludes: Blessed…Who chose Jerusalem; and concerning the priests in and of themselves, which concludes: Blessed…Who chose the priests; and concerning the rest of the prayer, which concludes: Blessed…Who listens to prayer.

וּמְבָרֵךְ עָלֶיהָ שְׁמוֹנֶה בְּרָכוֹת: עַל הַתּוֹרָה, וְעַל הָעֲבוֹדָה, וְעַל הַהוֹדָאָה, וְעַל מְחִילַת הֶעָוֹן, וְעַל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, וְעַל יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָן, וְעַל יְרוּשָׁלַיִם בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ, וְעַל הַכֹּהֲנִים בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָן, וְעַל שְׁאָר הַתְּפִלָּה.

The Mishna comments: One who sees the High Priest reading the Torah does not see the bull and goat that are burned; and one who sees the bull and goat that are burned does not see the High Priest reading the Torah. The Mishna explains: And this is not due to the fact that one is not permitted to see both, but because there was a distant path between them, and the performance of both of them is undertaken simultaneously.

הָרוֹאֶה כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל כְּשֶׁהוּא קוֹרֵא — אֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה פַּר וְשָׂעִיר הַנִּשְׂרָפִין, וְהָרוֹאֶה פַּר וְשָׂעִיר הַנִּשְׂרָפִין — אֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל כְּשֶׁהוּא קוֹרֵא. וְלֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי, אֶלָּא שֶׁהָיְתָה דֶּרֶךְ רְחוֹקָה, וּמְלֶאכֶת שְׁנֵיהֶן שָׁוָה כְּאַחַת.

GEMARA: From the fact that it is taught in the mishna that the High Priest is permitted to read in a white robe of his own, one may derive by inference that the reading of the Torah is not classified as a service, which would have required that he wear priestly vestments.

גְּמָ׳ מִדְּקָתָנֵי בְּאִצְטְלִית לָבָן מִשֶּׁלּוֹ, מִכְּלָל דִּקְרִיאָה לָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא.

But the mishna also teaches: If he wished to read the Torah while still dressed in the fine linen garments, he may read wearing them. This is true even though they are consecrated as priestly vestments and the reading of the Torah is not a sacred service. Therefore, the Gemara suggests: Learn from this that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments, i.e., even when not engaged in performing a service, a priest may derive benefit from the priestly vestments, for example, by wearing them for his own needs. If so, this would settle a long-standing unresolved dilemma concerning this issue. The Gemara rejects this suggestion: A proof may not be adduced from here because perhaps reading from the Torah is different, since it is for the purpose of the service; therefore, even though it is not a true service in its own right, it is nevertheless permitted for the High Priest to continue wearing the priestly vestments.

וְקָתָנֵי: אִם רָצָה לִקְרוֹת בְּבִגְדֵי בוּץ — קוֹרֵא, שָׁמְעַתְּ מִינַּהּ בִּגְדֵי כְהוּנָּה נִיתְּנוּ לֵיהָנוֹת בָּהֶן! דִּילְמָא שָׁאנֵי קְרִיאָה דְּצוֹרֶךְ עֲבוֹדָה הִיא.

As the dilemma was raised before us: Is it permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments, or is it not permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments?

דְּאִיבַּעְיָא לַן: בִּגְדֵי כְהוּנָּה נִיתְּנוּ לֵיהָנוֹת בָּהֶן, אוֹ לֹא נִיתְּנוּ לֵיהָנוֹת בָּהֶן.

Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma based on a mishna: The priests would not sleep in the sacred vestments out of concern they might pass wind while sleeping. One may infer: It is specifically sleep which is not permitted, but they may eat while wearing the priestly vestments, even though eating is not a service. This should prove that it is permitted to derive personal benefit from wearing priestly vestments. The Gemara rejects this proof: A proof may not be adduced from here because perhaps eating is different, since it is for the purpose of the Temple service. As it was taught in a baraita that the verse states: “And they shall eat those things with which atonement was made” (Exodus 29:33), which teaches that the priests eat the meat of the offerings and the owners of those offerings thereby achieve atonement.

תָּא שְׁמַע: לֹא הָיוּ יְשֵׁנִים בְּבִגְדֵי קוֹדֶשׁ. שֵׁינָה הוּא דְּלָא, הָא מֵיכָל — אָכְלִי! דִּילְמָא שָׁאנֵי אֲכִילָה דְּצוֹרֶךְ עֲבוֹדָה הִיא, כִּדְתַנְיָא: ״וְאָכְלוּ אוֹתָם אֲשֶׁר כּוּפַּר בָּהֶם״ — מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהַכֹּהֲנִים אוֹכְלִים וּבְעָלִים מִתְכַּפְּרִין.

The Gemara suggests making a different inference from that mishna cited above: One may infer that it is specifically sleep which is not permitted, but they may walk while wearing the sacred vestments even when not engaged in a service. This should prove that it is permitted to derive benefit from wearing priestly vestments. The Gemara rejects this proof: It is incorrect to make this inference since by right the mishna should have stated that walking in priestly vestments is also not permitted.

שֵׁינָה הוּא דְּלָא, הָא הַלּוֹכֵי — מְהַלְּכִי! בְּדִין הוּא דְּהַלּוֹכֵי נָמֵי לָא,