MISHNAH: Seven days before the Day of Atonement one isolates the High Priest from his house to the Parhedrin lodge and one prepares another Cohen because he might become disqualified. Rebbi Jehudah says, one also prepares for him another wife, since maybe his wife would die, for it is said, he shall atone for himself and his house 16:6. , his house means his wife. The Sages said to him, in this case the procedure never ends.
HALAKHAH: “Seven days before the Day of Atonement,” etc. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan understood if 37; differently Babli 2a. from the following: As he did on that day 8:34, referring to the dedication of the Tabernacle, where Aaron and his sons spent seven full days, day and night, at the Tabernacle, far from their families. , these are the seven days of initiation. Did the Eternal command for future generations. To make, this is the goat of the Day of Atonement 16:15 for the blood of the goat sacrificed on the Day of Atonement. The same verb also is used in 9:7 with reference to the goat sacrificed on the eighth day of dedication which happened to be the first of the first month. . Or maybe it is the goat of a New Moon? Rebbi Abba said, to atone for you, an atonement which is like the other. Since the one is atonement of Aaron himself and his sons themselves, the other also must be atonement of Aaron himself and his sons themselves
Rebbi Jonah in the name of Bar Qappara understood it from the following. As he did on that day, these are the seven days of initiation. Did the Eternal command, this is burning of the Cow 3:1). . It is said here, did the Eternal command, and it is said there 19:2. , this is the low of the Torah which the Eternal commanded, saying.” To make, this is the goat of the Day of Atonement. Or maybe it is the goat of a New Moon? As Rebbi Abba said, to atone for you, an atonement which is like the other. Since the one is atonement valid only through the High Priest, the other also 16 refer exclusively to actions by the High Priest. Babli 3b. is atonement through the High Priest.
What is the difference between the Cohen who burns the Cow and the High Priest on the Day of Atonement? The separation of the first is for purity and his brothers the priests refrain from touching him. The separation of the other is for holiness and his brothers the priests touch him. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan, who infers from that verse, [it is exceptional for the Cow, it is an embellishment for the Cow 3:1. , one understands it. In the opinion of Bar Qappara who does not infer it from this verse], why does one touch here but not touch there? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, that his brothers the priests should not make him impure. [But will he not be impure because of his sprinkling 129). But this impurity is minor, it can be removed by immersion in a miqweh and the following sundown. It is obvious that no sprinkling can be done on the day of the burning. In fact, a Pharisee Cohen burning the Cow is made impure and has to cleanse himself in a miqweh on the day of the ceremony because of a quarrel with Sadducees, Mishnah Parah 3:7. ?] Rebbi Abun said, even Bar Qappara holds that it is exceptional for the Cow, it is an embellishment for the Cow.
Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: But since the he-goat of initiation obstructs, does the he-goat of the Day of Atonement also obstruct 9:2) is one unit; there could be no bull without a he-goat. But in Mishnah Menaḥot 4:2 it is stated that for all holiday sacrifices bulls and he-goats are independent of one another. If the rules of the Day of Atonement are derived from the rules of the initiation rites, the Mishnah would have to state an exception for the Day of Atonement. ? And he accepted it from him. [On that Rebbi Mana said, I am wondering how could Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish ask before Rebbi Joḥanan and he accepted it from him?] Should he not have objected to him that we do not find that anything obstructing can be inferred from anything not obstructing, nor can anything not obstructing be inferred from anything obstructing? “He breaks the neck”, “to burn in smoke” 1:15), in the same verse it is required that the Cohen break the neck of the bird and burn it in smoke on the altar. . Since (breaking the neck) is done on top of the altar, so (breaking the neck) [burning in smoke] I Parshata 7(4). is done on the top of the altar. Breaking the neck obstructs, burning in smoke does not obstruct. “Permanently,” [“permanently].” “Permanently” is mentioned for the pan-baked breads 6:12–16), a tenth of an epha of fine flour baked into “breads” (v. 14) without a specified number. “Permanent” is stated in v. 13. and “permanently” is mentioned for the shew-bread 24:5. The arrangement is called “permanent” in v. 24:8. .] The shew-breads are obstructive, the pan-baked breads are not obstructive. Since [“permanently” mentioned for the pan-baked breads refers to twelve,] so “permanently” mentioned [for the shew-bread refers to twelve 6:5, but a deviation from this number invalidates only shew-bread, not the High Priest’s offering. . “Taking”, “taking”. “Taking” mentioned in Egypt 12:22, the commandment to take “a bundle of hyssop”. , “taking” is mentioned for lulav 23;40, the commandment to take 4 kinds of plants; it is not mentioned that they must be tied as a bundle. . [Since “taking” mentioned in Egypt implies a bundle 11b, and Sifra Emor Pereq 16(1), this is rejected as R. Jehudah’s minority opinion. , so also “taking” mentioned for lulav implies a bundle.] For the lulav it obstructs, in Egypt it did not obstruct. Therefore we found things obstructing can be inferred from anything not obstructing, and things not obstructing can be inferred from anything obstructing.
Since Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish has this objection, from where does Rebbi Simeon derive it? Following that of Rebbi Ismael: With this Aaron shall come into the Sanctuary 16:3. , what was said in the matter. One separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Also in this case one separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Is that spelled out in the matter? But since the death of Aaron’s sons is mentioned in the matter 16:1. and they died during the initiation, it is as if the matter was mentioned. Does not in the end Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish understand it from the same verse? But he is like a person who hears a statement and questions it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is: the glory of the Eternal was dwelling on Mount Sinai 24:16. . Just as Moses did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was sanctified in the cloud all of seven days, so Aaron did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was inducted by the anointing oil all of seven days.
In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, why is the death of Aaron’s sons mentioned in the matter when they died during initiation? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, Aaron’s sons died on the First of Nisan; why does He mention their death at the Day of Atonement 16:1. ? To teach you that just as the Day of Atonement atones for Israel, so the death of the Just atones for Israel. Rebbi Ba bar Binah said, why did the verse append the death of Miriam to the Chapter of the Cow 19; the death of Miriam is noted in v. 20:1. ? To teach you that just as the ashes of the Cow atone for Israel, so the death of the Just atones for Israel. Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said, why did the verse append the death of Aaron to the breaking of the Tablets9:7–29; Aaron’s death is mentioned in 10:6 in a verse which requires further explanation, given in the next paragraph without reference to the Day of Atonement. Lev. rabba 20, end. ? To teach you that the death of the Just is as hard for the Holy One, praise to Him, as the breaking of the Tablets.
of Yalqut Shimˋony reproduced by L. Ginsberg in his Yerushalmi Fragments from the Genizah, pp. 311–313, referred to by Q. A short parallel is in the Babli, Roš Haššanah 3a; parallels are in Mekhilta dR. Ismael Bešallaḥ, Masekhta de Wayassa 1; Tanḥuma Ḥuqqat 18. The entire paragraph is discussed by Rashi in his Commentary to Num. 26:13. It is written 10:6. According to Num., he did not die at Mosera and never was buried. In the text, the word [אל] has been added from the masoretic text and Q. : and the Children of Israel travelled from the wells of Bene Yaaqon to Mosera; there Aaron died. Did Aaron die at Mosera? Did he not die on Mount Hor? This is what is written 33:38. , Aaron the Priest ascended Mount Hor by the order of the Eternal and died there. But when Aaron died, the clouds of glory disappeared and the Canaanites wanted to attack them. This is what is written21:1. , the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who was dwelling in the Negev, heard that Israel came in the way of Atarim, and made war against Israel. What means “in the way of Atarim”? That the great scout had died who had scouted the way for them. They came and attacked them. Then Israel wanted to return to Egypt and returned eight travel stations 33. . The tribe of Levi ran after them and killed from them eight families. Also they killed from them four families, 26:23. (See Rashi, quoted in Note 44). for the Amramite, the Yisharite, the Ḥevronite, the Uzzielite. When did they recover? In the days of David. This is what is written 72:6. , in his days the just may bloom, immense peace, without moon-periods. They said, what caused us all this bloodshed? They said, because we did not show compassion for this perfect person. They sat down, organized his eulogies, and showed compassion for this Just; then the Omnipresent credited them as if he had died there, was buried there, and they showed compassion for the perfect person.
Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the tenth of an ephah and breeches obstruct 6:13) as well as the breeches which are part of the priests’ holy garments (Ex. 28:42–43), even though they are mentioned neither in the instructions for the initiation rites given to Moses (Ex. 28) nor in the record of the execution of these instructions (Lev. 8), are necessary and the omission of the offering or failure to wear the breeches would have invalidated the entire proceedings. Babli 5b. . What is the reason? Both are “making”6:14, for the high priest in Lev. 6:15, and Moses is ordered to “make breeches” for the priests in Ex. 28:42. . Rebbi Ḥanina said, and do with Aaron and his sons so 29:35. The verse continues, all that I commanded you. , all which is written in the Chapter obstructs. This comes following what Rebbi Samuel bar Nahman said in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: this is the word 8:5, the declaration of Moses to the people explaining the initiation rites. , and this is the word 29:1, the instruction for future initiation rites. , even reading the Chapter obstructs. Rebbi Joḥanan said, anything obstructing for future generations obstructs here, [and anything not obstructing for future generations does not obstruct here.] What do you have? The leaning of hands 29:10,15,19) which for the initiation rites is an essential act but in the rules of sacrifices (Lev. 1–5) is prescribed only for private offerings, and in no case would the failure to follow the requirement disqualify the sacrifice. and the remainders of the blood which are not obstructing in future generations are obstructing here. Rebbi Ḥanina said, the diadem and Aaron’s mitre precede the sons’ belts. Jehudah the great says, you shall gird them with belts, Aaron and his sons 29:9, the commandment to Moses. . Rebbi Idi said, what you are saying is as a meritorious deed. But as a commandment, Moses brought near Aaron and his sons and washed them in water, and after that, he put the vest on him, and after that, Moses brought Aaron and his sons near and clothed them with shirts 8:6,7,13, description of the execution. .
Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose not stated, and R. Tanḥum objected that his assertion already was a tannaitic statement, he must be an otherwise unknown Amora. Since Aaron entered the High Priesthood only on the eighth day, Moses must have acted as High Priest during the first seven. Babli Avodah zarah 34a as tannaitic statement. said, it is clear to us that Moses officiated in the High Priesthood in a white robe. Rebbi Tanḥum bar Yudan said, it was stated: 14. “All seven days of initiation did Moses officiate in the High Priesthood but the Divine Presence was not drawn through him. When Aaron dressed in the priestly garments and officiated, the Divine Presence was drawn through him.” What is the reason? For today the Eternal will appear to you. 9:4.
Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina asked, how was the tenth of an epha brought? Was it brought half or [brought] whole? Since it is written 9:23. , Moses and Aaron came to the Tent of Meeting, this teaches that he only came with him to teach him the work of incense. [This implies that] half it was brought. If you are saying that it was brought whole, one should have stated, about he work of incense and the tenth of an epha. Rebbi Tanḥum bar Yudan said, are we not concerned with service inside? He already had taught him about service outside.
What were the initiation sacrifices? Private sacrifice or public sacrifice? Since it is written 8:18. , Aaron and his sons leaned with their hands on the he-goat’s head, it follows that it was private sacrifice. But it was stated, public sacrifice 13. . Rebbi Idi said, the community volunteered and handed them over to them. From where was initiation deduced 8:35) that Aaron and his sons have to sit at the gate of the Tabernacle “seven days, day and night” All sacrifices which are eaten “one day and one night” may be eaten during the day of the sacrifice and the following night. ? From sacrifices or from Creation? If you are saying from sacrifices, the night follows the day. If you are saying from Creation, the day follows the night. If you are saying from sacrifices, the last night has no day. If you are saying from Creation, the first day has no night.
There, we have stated 11:7, describing the order in which the shew-bread was removed from the table in the Tent of Meeting on the Sabbath and new bread deposited when the verse prescribes that the shew-bread always be on the table. : “These take away and those put down. And the hand of one is close to the hand of the other, for it is said 25:30. , before Me always.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s. But according to Rebbi Joḥanan does Rebbi Meïr agree that if they removed the old set in the morning and arranged the new set in the evening this is also “always”. “Rebbi Yose says, also these may remove and those put down; for this also is ‘always’. 11:7, describing the order in which the shew-bread was removed from the table in the Tent of Meeting on the Sabbath and new bread deposited when the verse prescribes that the shew-bread always be on the table. ” Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose inferred this from the sitting of Aaron and his sons. As you are saying, at the sitting of Aaron and his sons it was necessary that the day deliver to the night and the night deliver to the day, so here it was necessary that the day deliver to the night and the night deliver to the day. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Yose said, it was sufficient that the day deliver to the night. What does Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph say about the sitting of Aaron and his sons?, Since if there, where it is written “always”, you are saying that it was sufficient that the day deliver to the night, here where it is not written “always” not so much more? You have to say that in Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion there were seven erections and six dismantlings. In Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph’s opinion here were fourteen erections and thirteen dismantlings 8:34 requires that Aaron and his sons not leave the sacred domain during 7 days, but v. 35 states that they have to sit there “day and night”, it follows that they could not leave, and therefore the Tent could not be disassembled, during the days, but it could be disassembled in the night after nightfall, then re-erected for the night, and disassembled after dawn. . It was stated 36; Num. rabba 12(18); Seder Olam Chapter 7. : “All seven days of initiation did Moses anoint the Tabernacle, erected and dismantled it, and performed in it the services. On the eighth day, he erected it and did not dismantle. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah said, on the eighth day also he erected, anointed, and dismantled.” Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that erection in the night is invalid for service during the day 12(18). . You have to say that in Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion following Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah there were fourteen erections and thirteen dismantlings. In Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph’s opinion following Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah there were 21 erections and 20 dismantlings 12(18). .
From where the dismantlings? Rebbi Zeˋira said, 7:1. Since on this day the princes of the tribes started presenting their sacrifices, it must be the day when Aaron and his sons already officiated, the eighth day of initiation. Since the Tent of Meeting already was erected on the first day, finishing the erections on the eighth implies some dismantling in between. it was on the day that Moses stopped erecting the Dwelling, on the day the erections stopped. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, as he did on that day, did the Eternal command 8:34. Since the verse implies that all of seven days the ritual commanded in Ex. 29 had to be repeated, including the erection of the Tent of Meeting. . Was this not already stated? One in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan , and one in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish.
On the Eighth {Day}. There are Tannaim who state, it was anointed; and there are Tannaim who state, it was not anointed. There are Tannaim who state, it was dismantled; and there are Tannaim who state, it was not dismantled. Rebbi Ḥanin said, it is obvious for us that for him who said, it was anointed it was dismantled; and for him who said, it was not anointed it was not dismantled. Him who said, it was anointed, one understands since it is written he anointed them 7:1. Since on this day the princes of the tribes started presenting their sacrifices, it must be the day when Aaron and his sons already officiated, the eighth day of initiation. Since the Tent of Meeting already was erected on the first day, finishing the erections on the eighth implies some dismantling in between. . But he who said, it was not anointed, how does he uphold he anointed them? I consider it as if it were missing anointment and you anointed it. Him who said, it was anointed, one understands since it is written 29:37. If the altar was not put out of commission in the meantime because the Tent was dismantled, only one atonement would have been necessary. Therefore every day must have seen a new commissioning of the altar. , seven days they shall atone the altar. But he who said, it was not dismantled, how does he uphold seven days they shall atone the altari Atonement by blood, as it was stated: On both of them they were sprinkling from all purifications that were there, so that the water should penetrate under the blood, the words of Rebbi Jehudah; Rebbi Yose says, under the blood and under the anointing oil.
Ben Bathyra explained: Perhaps he would sleep with his menstruating wife and be pushed away all of seven days 15:24. . But are Israel suspected about menstruating women 4:1 Note 3 (SJ 34). ? Following what was stated there 2:5, Notes 80,81. : “If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure, if he separates immediately he is liable, for his separation is as pleasurable to him as his entry and becomes totally pure at the next sundown. But if he separates while still with erection, he had intercourse with a menstruating woman and is severely impure for seven days. Ben Bathyra’s argument presupposes that the High Priest is an ignoramus. .” You have to say that he who transmits the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan needs that of Ben Bathyra, and he who transmits the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan needs that of Ben Bathyra. If Rebbi Joḥanan had said but not Ben Bathyra, we would have said that he may have sex but sleep in the Palhedrin lodge; therefore one needs that of Ben Bathyra. If Ben Bathyra had said but not Rebbi Joḥanan , we would have said, let him not have sex but he may sleep in his house; therefore one needs that of Rebbi Joḥanan , and one needs that of Ben Bathyra.
“All lodges which were in the Temple were not liable for mezuzah except for the Palhedrin lodge which was the abode of the High Priest for seven days every year. Rebbi Jehudah said, also this is a decree which was decreed about it.” In your gates 6:9. . There are Tannaim who state, to exclude the gates of the Temple Mount and the Courtyards 36. . There are Tannaim who state, to include. He who said to exclude, Rebbi Jehudah. He who said to include, the rabbis. Rebbi Jehudah says it correctly; what is the rabbis’ reason? In your gates, are these lodgings? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun asked, but did we not state, in your gates, to include city gates? Are these lodgings? But through them one enters lodgings, so also here through them one enters lodgings.
in Megillah 4:12 ( ל ). They have no direct connection with the topic treated here. Huldat hammulim “entrances of cave dwellings” has no linguistic basis and would be superfluous. A possibility is Jastrow’s explanation, ‘loading and unloading dock for mules”, from מולא, Latin mulus, mula, the mule. is liable for mezuzah. A window, four by four {cubits} wide, in which slaves sit and make wind for their masters are liable for mezuzah. Coops one on top of the other are liable for mezuzah; one steps on the doorstep below. Rebbi Yose was sorry not to have seen the coop of Rebbi Ilai which he had made according to all rabbis according to everybody. .
“To the Palhedrin lodge.” Abba Shaul was calling it the council member’s lodge. Earlier it was called the council member’s lodge. But now one calls it the Palhedrin lodge. The ex-priests 13, p. 16, as προϊεραθέντες, ex-priests, is the correct one. , a passing matter. In the first {Temple}, where he, his son, and his grandson served, there were eighteen priests serving. But in the second, where they bought it for money, but some say that they killed one another by sorcery, there served 80 priests, but some say 81, and some say 82, and some say 84, and some say 85. And from these Simeon the Just served for 40 years. Rebbi Aḥa said, it is written 10:27. Babli 9a. , the fear of the Eternal adds days, these are the priests who served in the first Temple, but the years of the wicked ones will be shortened’, these are those who served in the second building. It happened that one sent through his son two measures of silver, full of silver, and their covers silver. Another came and sent through his son two measures of gold, full of gold, and their covers gold. They said, the foal overturned the candelabrum R. Levy said, it happened that a woman honored a judge with a silver candelabrum. Her opponent in the suit went and honored him with a golden foal. The next day the woman went and found the judgment against her. She said to him, My lord, may the judgment be radiant before you like the silver candelabrum. He said to her, what can I do? The foal overturned the candelabrum. The Yerushalmi text is quoted in Sifry Num. 131; Pesiqta dR. Cahana A hare Mot towards end, Lev. rabba 21(8). .
We find that the Temple was destroyed the first time only because they were active idolators, and uncoverers of nakedness 18.) , and spillers of blood. And so the second time. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Torta said, we find that Shiloh was destroyed only because they slighted the holidays and desecrated the sancta. We find that the Temple was destroyed the first time only because they were active idolators, and uncoverers of nakedness, and spillers of blood. But of the second we know that they toiled in the Torah, were careful about the commandments and tithes, and every good custom (E. G.). was in them; only they loved money and hated one another without reason. Hate without reason is hard for it is the equivalent if idolatry, and uncovering nakedness, and spilling of blood. An example. Rebbi Zeˋira, and Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, and Rebbi Abuna, were sitting and saying, it is worse since the first time it was rebuilt but the second time it was not rebuilt. Rebbi Zeˋira said, the first ones repented, the second ones did not repent. Rebbi Eleazar said, the first time their sin was brought into the open and so was their end; the second time their sin was brought into the open but their end was not brought into the open. They asked Rebbi Eliezer, are the later generations more qualified than the first? He told them, your witness, the Temple, shall prove it. Our forefathers removed the ceiling, the curtain of Jehudah was lifted , but we blew out the walls, who are saying, make bare, make bare, up to its foundations 137:7. . They said, any generation in which it is not rebuilt is debited as if it had destroyed it.
3:3, Notes 146–188 and Megillah 1:12. “One arranges for another Cohen as his replacement, maybe a disqualification of his will happen.” How? Does one leave them alone together? Rebbi Haggai said, by Moses! If one would leave them alone together, he would kill him! Him 6:12; the offering of the High Priest starting with the day he is anointed for his office. Sifra Ṣaw Parašah 3(3). The singular indicates that only one High Priest can be appointed at one time. This implies that the reserve appointee for the day of Atonement cannot have the status of High Priest unless he actually is needed. . One anoints one, one does not anoint two. Rebbi Joḥanan said, because of rivalry.
If one was incapacitated and the other officiated. The first has all the sanctity of the High Priesthood on him; the second one is qualified neither as High Priest nor as common priest 12b), “one increases in sanctity but never decreases” (cf. Bikkurim 3:3, Note 57; Megillah 1:12 72a 1. 47, Š evuot 1:8, 33b 1.13). Since the service of the Day of Atonement is valid only if performed by the High Priest, the substitute becomes a temporary High Priest. He cannot act as a High Priest if the actual High Priest’s temporary disability is removed, and he is permanently barred from acting as a common priest. As the Babli points out, if the High Priest dies, the substitute automatically becomes his successor. Tosephta 1:4. . Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he transgressed and officiated, his officiating is valid. Whose officiating? Let us hear from the following: It happened to Ben Illem from Sepphoris that the High Priest experienced an emission of semen on the Day of Atonement; Ben Illem entered and officiated in his stead. He went out and asked the king: “The bull and the he-goat which are brought today, are they offered from his or from the High Priest’s property? 37; differently Babli 2a. ” The king understood what he was asking and answered him, “is it not enough for you that you served once before Him Who spoke and the world was created?” Ben Illem understood that he was removed from the High Priesthood.
20 (end), Tanḥuma Aḥare 7, Tanḥuma Buber Aḥare 9 (Note 127), Num. rabba 2 (end), Pesiqta dR. Cahana Aḥare (ed. Buber Note 126), Avot deR. Natan A, Chap. 35 (ed. Schechter fol. 35a.) lt happened that Simeon ben Qimḥit went out to talk to (an Arab king) [the king on the eve of the Day of Atonement] iv, pp. 805–806. Speculations about the background of this tradition are in H. Grätz, Geschichte der Juden 3/2, Note 19ii (4th. ed., pp. 738–739). and a drop of spittle squirted on his garment and defiled him. His brother Jehudah entered and officiated in his stead. On that day their mother saw two of her sons as High Priests. Qimḥit had seven sons; all of them served as High Priests. They sent and asked Qimḥit, what good deeds are in your hand? She told them, there should come over me if the beams of the roof of my house ever saw the hair on my head or the seam of my undershirt. They said, all flours are flour but Qimḥit’s flour is fine flour. They recited about her 45:14. : All the honor of the king’s daughter is inside; gold settings her garments
I could think that the Anointed for War 20:1–15. should bring his tenth of an ephah 6:15. . The verse says 29:30. The only hereditary office in Divine Service is that of the High Priest. Babli 72b/73a. , in his stead, of his sons. One whose son will serve in his stead [brings a tenth of an ephah. ] This excludes the Anointed for War whose son will not serve in his stead. From where that the Anointed’s for War son will not serve in his stead? The verse says 29:30 , seven days shall the priest wear them in his stead, one of his sons. If one officiates in the Tent of Meeting, his son will stand in his stead. This excludes the Anointed for War who does not officiate in the Tent of Meeting, From where that he can be appointed as High Priest? 9:20. The leader of the priests is the High Priest. Phineas was appointed Anointed for War by Moses, Num. 31:6. [As it is said,] Phineas the son of Eleazar was leader over them; in earlier times the Eternal was with him. When Rebbi Yose wanted to needle Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose, he said to him, “before, he was with him.” In the days of Zimri 27:1–15. , he protested. In the days of the concubine at Gibea 19–21. In the opinion of Seder Olam, based on the teachings of R. Yose the Tanna (who is the R. Yose quoted here), the affair at Gibea happened at the start of the period of the Judges, when Phineas was High Priest. Cf. the author’s edition of Seder Olam (Northvale NJ 1998), pp. 122–123. , he did not protest.
And from where that he was asked in eight. 28:30) it is obvious that the Anointed for War must wear one of these garments for the oracle. But since all eight garments of the High Priest form an indivisible unit, he must wear all of them. ? Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan : And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants [in his stead] . 29:30 continues: To be anointed in them and inducted into office . Since the one Anointed for War is anointed, he seems to qualify. . Why does the verse say, in his stead? For greatness after him. And from where that he officiated in eight? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan : And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants . Why does the verse say, in his stead ? For sanctity after him. Rebbi Jonah said to him, I was with you; he did not say “officiated” but “was asked”. [In how many was he asked?] Rav Hoshaia brought a Mishnah of Bar Qappara from the South which stated: He officiates neither in the eight of a High Priest nor in the four of a common priest. Rebbi Abba said, it would be logical that he officiate in four. Why did they say that he did not officiate? Lest people say, we saw a High Priest who sometimes officiated in four like a simple priest. Rebbi Jonah said, would he not officiate inside and would he not be asked outside? Does one err between inside and outside? But did Rebbi Tarphon, the father of all of Israel, not err between blowing for assembly and the blowing for a sacrifice? As it is written: The descendants of Aaron, the priests, shall blow the trumpets . 10:8. , blameless ones, not with bodily defects, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons if I did not see my mother’s brother, lame in one of his legs, standing in the Temple court with his trumpet in his hand and blowing! Rebbi Aqiba answered him, Rebbi, maybe you saw him only at the time of assembly. 10:8. ; but I was saying, at the time of sacrifices. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons but you did not deviate right or left. I am the one who heard but I could not explain. 10:3) is extended to use trumpets to introduce the public Torah reading in the Temple at Tabernacles in the Sabbatical Year ( Deut . 31:10–13). . You derive it and agree with tradition. Therefore, anybody who separates from you is as if he separated himself from his life.
The priest shall atone who was anointed. 16:32. The problem is the legitimacy of a priest appointed ad hoc as High Priest to conduct the service of the Day of Atonement for which common priests are disqualified. Sifra Aḥara Mot Pereq 8((4–5). . Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where to include another priest? The verse says, who was anointed ; with the anointing oil. From where the one clothed in multiple garb? The verse says, who was inducted into office . And from where another who was appointed? The verse says, the priest shall atone . How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth. כהן). . Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court for Israel. 5:6. The oral promise was irrevocable. Here end the parallels in Horaiot and Megillah . ”
“From where that just as one prepares another Cohen in his stead for maybe a disability will happen to him, so one preliminarily marries to him another wife in case something happen to his wife, as it is said.16:11. , and he atone for himself and for his house ; his house is his wife, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Yose said to him, in that case there is no end to it, maybe not only this wife but also the other wife would die 8(6). He cannot marry her outright since a High Priest (and any priest aspiring to that position) is restricted to a single wife, as explained later in the paragraph. .” Rebbi Mana said, before you question Rebbi Jehudah, question Rebbi Jehudah, question the rabbis! Maybe an emission would happen both to this Cohen and to the other Cohen. Emissions are frequent 3:3 (Note 79). While the Mishnah is anonymous, the fact that R. Jehudah does not oppose the ruling indicates that he approves of it. , death is not frequent. They decided about what is frequent, but did not decide about what is infrequent. We find that Rebbi Jehudah said, death is frequent; that is what we have stated there: “Rebbi Jehudah says, one also prepares for him another wife, maybe his wife would die.” There we have stated 3:3 (Note 79). While the Mishnah is anonymous, the fact that R. Jehudah does not oppose the ruling indicates that he approves of it. : “One who brings a bill of divorce and left him old or sick, delivers to her under the presumption that the man be alive.” There you are saying, death is infrequent, and here you are saying, death is frequent. There it is a private matter, here a public act. Is one more restrictive in public acts, as we have stated 3:3, Gittin 7:4 (Notes 195–107). The horns were openings of boxes where people could deposit money for specified sacrifices and assume that the boxes would be emptied every day and the necessary sacrifices offered. In particular a woman after childbirth who may not eat sancta unless she brought her purification sacrifice may deposit the money and eat sancta after sundown without inquiring whether the offering had actually been brought. A “nest” is a couple of pigeons or turtle-doves. : “Rebbi Jehudah says, there was no horn for nests in Jerusalem because of mixing, maybe one of them would die and it would turn out that money of purification sacrifices that must be left to die is mixed up in the offering.” Could he not preliminarily marry her yesterday? And he atone for himself and for his house ; but not for two houses. Rebbi Gamliel bar Inyani asked before Rebbi Mana: Is he not like one who acquires something on the Sabbath? He answered him, it is because they permitted Sabbath restriction in the Sanctuary. Rebbi Mana said, this implies that those who marry a widow must take her in when it is still daytime, lest he be like someone who acquires on the Sabbath.
MISHNAH: All seven days he pours the blood, and burns the incense, and cleans the lights, and brings head and feet to the altar. On any other day, if he wants to sacrifice he sacrifices since the High Priest is first in line to sacrifice his part and to take his part.
HALAKHAH: Does he not become impure because of his sprinklings 129, based on Num. 19:21)? Cf. Note 17. ? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, they were sprinkling on him after he had brought his offerings.
“Since the High Priest is first in line to sacrifice and to take his part first.” How is this? “ This skin is mine; one loaf of the Two Breads, five loaves of the shew-bread.” In one case he takes everything, in the other case he takes half? Rebbi Zeˋira said, in the first case, a private sacrifice, in the other case, a public sacrifice. It was stated: “Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes only one half.” There are Tannaim who state, “Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes one half.” How is that? If there was one skin. The rabbis say, he takes it whole. Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes only one half. If there were four, five skins. The rabbis say, he takes one. Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes half. What is Rebbi’s reason? The remainder of the offering is for Aaron and his sons 2:3. Sifra Wayyiqra I Pereq 11(1). . Do we not know that Aaron is together with his sons? Why does the verse say 24:9 (on the shew-bread); Sifra Emor Pereq 18(10). , for Aaron and his sons ? But it means, Aaron shall take half of it and his sons shall take half.
As in the following: The city council and the military district had to bring a gift. The case came before Rebbi who said, the city council is not included in the military district. For which purpose did he say “city council and military district”? But that each party give one half. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi follows his opinion, as Rebbi said, fo r Aaron and his sons, half for Aaron and half for his sons.
Rebbi Abba bar Mamal objected: Does not a baraita disagree? “12:7. lf somebody says, I am taking on me the obligation to bring 100 esronim one tenth of an ephah, or 3/10 of a seˋah, approximately 3.6 liter. in two vessels, he shall bring 50 in one vessel each. But if he brought 60 it is a rule (Mishnah Menaḥot 12:4) that the maximum flour offering which can be brought in one vessel is 60 esronim. in one vessel and 40 in the other, he has fulfilled his obligation.” Somebody could say, I am taking on me the obligation to bring 100 esronim , simply, without specifying the number of vessels in which be brings them; why does he specify “to bring them in two vessels”? To bring them 50 in one vessel each/ And we have stated on this, if he brought 60 in one vessel and 40 in the other, he has fulfilled his obligation! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, since up to 60 they can be mixed12:4; Tosephta 12:8–9/ , it is as if from the start he fixed it at 60. It would be necessary to say, “if somebody says, I am taking on me the obligation to bring 60 esronim in two vessels, he shall bring 30 in one vessel each. But if he brought 40 in one vessel and 20 in the other, he has fulfilled his obligation. which does not involve 60 esronim . ” It was found stated thus.
Rebbi Ḥananiah the colleague of the rabbis asked: May one infer law of obligations from issaron ? It was found stated which supports R. Abba bar Mamal. It is not clear which subject and which person the baraita refers to. , “he inferred law of obligations from issaron. ” Rebbi Abun said, only he should not bring them. in three vessels. Rebbi Abba Mamal said, even in many vessels.
Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Every day the High Priest dresses in his robes, comes, and sacrifices the daily morning sacrifice. If there are vows or voluntary sacrifices, he offers them. Then he goes to his house, and returns to bring the daily evening sacrifice, and comes to stay overnight in the Palhedrin lodge. Rebbi Uqba in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: He did this only on Sabbath and holidays.
There are Tannaim who state: the diadem 28:36–38) which is worn to eliminate iniquities of sancta , to legitimate sacrifices even if they do not completely satisfy the prescribed rules. propitiates on his forehead. There are Tannaim who state: even in a corner. He who says, the diadem propitiates on his forehead, it always shall be on his forehead . 29:38. . But he who says, even in a corner, from the Day of Atonement. He who says, the diadem propitiates on his forehead, supports Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun; he who says, even in a corner, supports Rebbi Uqba.
MISHNAH: One sends him Elders from the Elders of the Court; they read before him the Order of the Day. 16. and say to him, Sir High Priest, read yourself with your mouth, maybe you forgot, or maybe you never learned. In the morning of the eve of the Day of Atonement one makes him stand at the Eastern Gate and brings before him oxen, and he-goats, and sheep, so he should recognize and be used to the service.
HALAKHAH: “Maybe you forgot, or maybe you never learned.” Did we not state, “ the priest, greater than his brethren . 21:10. , that his greatness be from his brethren, on whose head the anointing oil was poured. Rebbi says, in beauty, in riches, in wisdom, and in looks.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there in the first [Temple], here in the second 3:4), the verse does not necessarily apply to Second Temple High Priests. .
“One makes him stand at the Eastern Gates.” Where does one let him stand, inside or outside? If you are saying inside, what we stated there it follows that a pure person may enter the Temple courtyard without an additional immersion if he does not intend to serve there. Therefore if the High Priest was standing inside the gate, the Mishnah here agrees with the Mishnah there that the first immersion of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement is not connected with the special rules of that day. But if he was standing outside, no immersion is required, and nothing can be inferred from the Mishnah here. , “five immersions were there on that day, one because nobody entered the Temple courtyard for service, even if he was pure, unless he immersed himself, and four because of the Day of Atonement.” If you are saying outside, all of them were because of the Day of Atonement.
“One brings before him oxen, and he-goats, and sheep.” Why did he not say, a? Rebbi Abba from Carthage said, is he not anyhow obliged to pour? It was found stated, “and a goat”.
MISHNAH: All of the seven days one does not prevent him from food and drink. On the Eve of the Day of Atonement one does not allow him to eat much because food induces sleep.
HALAKHAH: It was stated: One allows him neither milk, nor eggs, nor cheese, nor fat meat, nor old wine, nor spiced wine, nor bean groats, nor lentils, Samuel said, nor citrus medica, nor anything which causes emission of semen. Nevertheless one was quoting for him the verse 127:1. If the Eternal does not build the house, in vain toil its builders. , if the Eternal does not build the house, etc. But was this not of the miracles which happened in the Temple 5:5. One of the ten miracles was that never was the High Priest incapacitated by an emission of semen on the Day of Atonement. ? Rebbi Abun said, because of you shall not try 6:16. . Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there in the first {Temple}, here in the second 5:5 applies only to the First Temple. .
MISHNAH: The Elders of the Court hand him over to the Elders of the priesthood; they lead him to the upper floor of the house of Eutinoos 1:1.) They had first to instruct him in the Pharisee interpretation of the verses since the matter of presentation of the incense in the Temple was the only matter of controversy between Sadducees and Pharisees in the service of the day of Atonement. Then they had to make him swear to follow the Pharisaic rules. They adjure him; this finishes their task and they leave. They say to him, Sir High Priest, we are the agents of the Court, and you are our agent and the Court’s agent. We adjure you by Him Who let His Name dwell in this House that you will not change anything of all we told you. He turns aside and cries, and they turn aside and cry.
HALAKHAH: It was located on top the the Water Gate and close to his lodge.
“He turns aside and cries,” that he was suspected. “And they turn aside and cry,” that they needed to do this. And why does one adjure him? Because of the Boethusians, who were saying that he starts the incense outside and brings it inside 16:13: He shall put the incense on the fire before the Eternal, and the incense cloud shall cover the cover which is on the testimonials so that he should not die. The Pharisaic interpretation is that the first part of the verse implies that the incense should be put into the fire inside the Holiest of Holies, which is before the Eternal. The Boethusian interpretation is based on the second part of the verse, that the cloud should cover him already at the entry into the Holiest of Holies. .
It happened that one person started the incense outside and brought it inside. When he left, he said to his father, even though you were interpreting all your days, you did not act until this man came and acted. He answered him, even though you were interpreting all our days, we acted only following the will of the Sages. I am wondering whether this man will have many days in the world. After a short time he died. But some are saying, his nose gushed out worms and something like a calf’s hoof grew in his brain.
4:8 ( ב ). It is an intellectual construct, rather than a historical report. Some want to say, he was the same for the Cow 3:8 with what is presumed here: “It happened that a Sadducee was pure from the preceding sundown when he came to burn the Cow, but Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai realized it; he came and leaned both of his hands on him and told him, Sir High Priest, how wonderful you are as High Priest, go and immerse yourself. He went down and immersed himself. After he came back he grated his earlobe and said to him, Ben Zakkai, when I shall be free to deal with you; he answered him, if you will be free. It was not three days before they put him in the grave.” Biblical impurity is only original impurity and derivative impurity in the first degree. Rabbinic impurity has derivative impurity in the second degree for unwashed hands, third degree impurity for heave, and fourth degree for sacrifices. Therefore, the intrinsically pure Ben Zakkai (who before the destruction of the Temple was not Rabban), by putting his second degree impure hands on the priest defiled the latter for sacra and forced him to immerse himself in a miqweh. Our sources seem to describe the Sadducee position correctly; cf. Dead Sea Scrolls fragment 4Q394, lines 16–18. , on Tabernacles 4:8, Tosephta Sukkah 3:16. The popular ceremony of water offering on the altar has no explicit foundation in the biblical text and was opposed by Sadducees (possibly only by the Boethusian sect.) A priest who poured out the water in contempt of the rite was killed by the etrogim ( citrus medica) which the people threw at him. , and on the Day of Atonement. Rebbi Simon does not say so, but either the Cow and Tabernacles was one and Atonement one, or Cow and Atonement was one and Tabernacles one. He who said, after a short time he died, he did all three. He who said, his nose gushed out worms and something like a calf’s hoof grew in his brain, follows him who said, either Cow and Tabernacles was one and Atonement one, or Cow and Atonement was one and Tabernacles one. The Courtyard cried about them, get out of here, sons of Eli, you defiled our God’s Temple 57a, Keritut 28a. . “On that day at the priest standing on the altar. Tosephta Sukkah 3:16; Babli Sukkah 48b. , the corner of the altar was damaged and they put a block of salt there lest it should look deficient since any altar without corner, or walkway, or base is disqualified.”
They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written 16:17. , nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written 1:10. , the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting1:7) ? He answered them, if he enters following normal rules
3(11). It is written 16:12–13. and he shall bring it inside the curtain, and put the incense in the fire before the Eternal, that he should not prepare outside and bring inside, since the Sadducees are saying, he shall prepare outside and then bring inside. If one does this before flesh and blood, a fortiori before the Omnipresent. Also it says 16:2. , for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover. The Sages said to them, has it not already been said, he shall put the incense in the fire before the Eternal; only inside he puts it on. If it is so, why was it said, for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover ? This teaches that he has to put in smoke-creating herb. From where that he has to add smoke-creating herb? The verse says 16:13. , the incense shall cover the cover over the chest , lest he die. If he failed to add smoke-creating herb or left out any of its ingredients he has committed a deadly sin 6a. . Lest he die, that is the punishment. For in a cloud I shall appear over the cover, this is the warning.
(13). Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon said, I could think that punishment and warning had been said before the death of the two sons of Aaron, the verse says 16:1. , after the death of the two sons of Aaron. If after the death of the two sons of Aaron. I could think that both had been said after the death of the two sons of Aaron, the verse says, for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover. How is that? The warning was said before the death of the two sons of Aaron, but the punishment was said after the death of the two sons of Aaron, Rebbi Zeˋura said, it does not say “because in a cloud I was seen over the cover,” but I shall be seen. From here that the Holy One, praise to Him, does not punish unless he had warned.
MISHNAH: If he was a scholar, he preaches; otherwise scholars preach before him. If he was used to reciting he recites; otherwise one recites before him. What does one recite before him? Job, Ezra, and Chronicles. Zacariah ben Qebutal says, many times I recited before him from Daniel.
HALAKHAH: It was stated, in Proverbs and Psalms, since their interest makes sleep disappear.
Cahana asked Rav, how shall we state, Qebutar or Qebutal and l but between b and p with opposite readings in the printed edition and the Munich ms. ? He was standing in prayer and indicated to him by his finger, a bird, kabōtar in Pahlevi, كبوتر kabūtar in Farsi. .
MISHNAH: If he became sleepy, the young priests drum before him with a dry finger and say to him, Sir High Priest, stand up and take it easy once on the floor. One occupies him until the time of slaughter.
HALAKHAH: Rav Ḥuna said, “with a dry finger” orally. But Rebbi Joḥanan said, “with a dry finger”, with the hand. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan “orally, not with harp nor with lute.” He explains it, the melody indicated by the dry finger one says orally, not with harp nor with lute.
MISHNAH: Every day one removes ashes from the altar6:1–6. about at the call of the cock, before it or after it. But on the Day of Atonement at midnight, and on holidays after the first watch. The cock did not crow before the Courtyard was full of Israel.
HALAKHAH: Rebbi Mana said, would it not be understandable if on the day of Atonement it were after the first watch and on holidays from midnight, that they should not become thirsty? Rebbi Joḥanan said, the removal of ashes is the start of the service of the next say and one had to sanctify his hands and feet from the basin which was immersed in water30:17–21. But the water used on one day would become unusable the next day unless it is at least 40 seˋah, the minimum volume of a miqweh whose water always is pure. Therefore the wash basin of the priests has to be immersed in a large miqweh during the night and can be lifted for easy use only at dawn. For the removal of ashes on the special days, hands and feet have to be washed in the miqweh. In the interpretation of the Babli Zevaḥim 21b, R. Joḥanan holds that since the removal of the ashes is the start of the service of the next day, the Cohen washing for the removal does not have to wash again for the morning service. .