## Jerusalem Talmud Yoma Chapter 3

###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:1:1)

**משנה:** אָמַר לָהֶן הַמְמוּנֶּה צְאוּ וּרְאוּ אִם הִגִּיעַ זְמַן הַשְּׁחִיטָה. אִם הִגִּיעַ הָרוֹאֶה אוֹמֵר בּוֹרְקִי. מַתְיָה בֶּן שְׁמוּאֵל אוֹמֵר הֵאִיר פְּנֵי כָל הַמִּזְרָח עַד שֶׁבְּחֶבְרוֹן. וְהוּא אוֹמֵר הֵין:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** The overseer said to them¹, “go and see whether the time of slaughter has arrived.” When it arrived, the lookout says “it is radiant.” Mathatias ben Samuel²5:1 as overseer of the lotteries. The sources are not unanimous about the meaning of these names, whether they came with the job or are a remembrance of outstanding personalities who once filled these positions. Some moderns presume that the list is of the last officials serving in the Second Temple. says, “was the entire East illuminated up to what is in Hebron³?” And he⁴ answers “yes”.

footnotes:
¹ Every day of the year, when the daily morning sacrifice was brought at dawn.
² He is mentioned in Mishnah Šeqalim
³ Even though Hebron is South of Jerusalem, as explained at the end of the Halakhah.
⁴ The lookout.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:1:2)

**הלכה:** אָמַר לָהֶן הַמְמוּנֶּה כול׳. מָהוּ בּוֹרְקִי. בַּרֶקֶת. תַּמָּן אָמְרִין. בְּרוֹק בּוֹרְקָה. אַנְהר מַנְהָרָא.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** ⁵2:1 (**א**).“The overseer said to them,” etc. What means *borqi? Bareqet*⁶*.* There⁷, they are saying, בְּרוֹק בּוֹרְקָה, getting light, radiant.

footnotes:
⁵ The Halakhah is copied in Roš Haššanah
⁶ The word denotes one of the precious stones in the breast plate of the High Priest, usually identified as agate or emerald. The word means radiant, from בָּרָק “lightning”.
⁷ In Babylonia; in the formulation of the Babli 28b בָּרָק בַּרְקַאי.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:1:3)

וְעֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא הָכָא שֶׁאֵין אַתְּ יְכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עָלָיו. וְחָשׁ לוֹמַר. עַד דּוּ עֲלִיל וּנְפַק הִיא מַנָהָרָה. חֲכִימָא הִיא מִילְּתָא. אָמַר עֵד אֶחָד. נוֹלַד אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי בַשַּׁבָּת. מַלִּין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּיו. חֲשֵׁיכָה מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת. מְטַלְטְלִין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּיו. רִבִּי אִימִּי מְטַלְטֵל עַל פּוּם מְלַוִּיתָא. רִבִּי מַתַּנְיָה מְטַלְטֵל עַל פּוּם אִיבִירִיתָא דְזִהֲרָא. רִבִּי אִמִּי מְטַלְטֵל עַל פּוּם נַשְׁיָיא דְאָמְרָן. שִׁמְשָׁא הֲוָות עַל סוּסִיתָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
May one witness be believed⁸? It is different here since one cannot control him; should we not worry and say, by the time somebody climbs up and goes out it will shine⁹? The matter can be verified. If one witness says, this male was born on the Sabbath, one circumcises him on his word¹⁰. Rebbi Immi was carrying on the result of elapsed time¹¹. Rebbi Mattaniah was carrying on the saying of the moon shining¹². Rebbi Immi was (carrying) [circumcising]¹³ the one in braces from *Roš Haššanah.* Since Hippos was on the Eastern shore of the Lake of Galilee, so that for people in Tiberias on the Western shore the sun shone over Hippos in the morning, the statement cannot refer to the Sabbath. The reading of *Roš Haššanah* has to be accepted. Since circumcision has to be performed during daytime, R. Immi is consistently restrictive; in this case he does not rely on astronomical computations of sunrise but on the much later observation of the sun appearing over the mountains to the East. on the saying of women, the sun was over Hippos.

footnotes:
⁸ The Babli holds in general that a single witness can be believed in matters of prohibitions; the biblical requirement of two witnesses is binding only in criminal cases and matters that may have implications in criminal law. From the present paragraph it seems that the Yerushalmi does not accept this in general but that in cases where one witness is sufficient there is no difference between male or female witnesses.
⁹ While the time indicated must be approximately correct, since one asks only at the end of the night, and by the time somebody climbs up to check it clearly will be dawn, this does not prove that at the time of the assertion dawn was really visible. The text cannot be amended and the “not” deleted since it is confirmed by both sources.
¹⁰ Even though circumcising on the Sabbath a child not born on the Sabbath is a deadly sin.
¹¹ Arabic ملوهَ “interval of time”. He computed the end of the Sabbath astronomically, for a smooth terrestrial globe; a severe restriction for Tiberias situated on a steep Eastern slope.
¹² The translation of איביריתא is conjectural. The direction of the shining part of the moon indicates the position of the sun, from which its position below the horizon (of a smooth terrestrial globe) can be inferred without complicated computations.
¹³ The text in parenthesis is from Yoma,


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:1:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:1:4)

וְלָמָּה עַד שֶׁהוּא בְּחֶבְרוֹן [וְהוּא] אוֹמֵר הֵין. בָּא לְהַזְכִּיר זְכוּת אָבוֹת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
And why “up to who is in Hebron? And he answers yes”? He comes to commemorate the merit of the Patriarchs.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:2:1)

**משנה:** וְלָמָה הוּצְרְכוּ לְכָךְ שֶׁפַּעַם אַחַת עָלָה מְאוֹר הַלְּבָנָה וְדִימּוּ שֶׁהֵאִיר הַמִּזְרָח וְשָׁחֲטוּ אֶת הַתָּמִיד וְהוֹצִיאוּהוּ לְבֵית הַשְּׂרֵפָה וְהוֹרִידוּ הַכֹּהֵן לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה. זֶה הַכְּלָל הָיָה בַמִּקְדָּשׁ כָּל הַמֵּסִיךְ אֶת רַגְלָיו טָעוּן טְבִילָה. וְכָל הַמַּטִּיל מַיִם טָעוּן קִדּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלָיִם:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Why did they need this? Because once the moon shone¹⁴ and they thought that it dawned to the East; they slaughtered the daily sacrifice and had to bring it outside to the place of burning¹⁵. Then they brought the Cohen¹⁶ to the place of immersion. This was the rule in the Temple: Everybody who spread his legs¹⁷3:26. needed immersion¹⁸; and everybody who urinated needed sanctification of hands and feet¹⁹.

footnotes:
¹⁴ As the Halakhah points out, this can happen only in the second half of a month and therefore could not refer to a Day of Atonement.
¹⁵ The outside place reserved for the burning of disqualified sacrifices or those whose blood was brought into the Sanctuary and which could not be burned on the altar.
¹⁶ All Babli and independent Mishnah texts read: The High Priest.
¹⁷ Defecated. A biblical expression Jud.
¹⁸ Of his entire body in a miqweh.
¹⁹ From the basin in the courtyard.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:2:2)

**הלכה:** מְאוֹר הַלְּבָנָה מְתַמֵּר וְעוֹלֶה. מְאוֹר הַחַמָּה פוֹסֶה עַל פְּנֵי כָל הַמִּזְרַח. עַד כְּדוֹן דַּהֲוָה סוֹפֵיהּ דְּיַרְחָא. הֲוָה רֵישֵׁיהּ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Moonlight comes up as a beam; sunlight spreads over the entire East²⁰. So far if it was the end of the month; if it was the start²¹?

footnotes:
²⁰ The reason given in the Mishnah is difficult to accept. In the Babli 28b it is explained that it was a cloudy day where the moonlight also was diffuse.
²¹ Even if one accepts the explanation of the Mishnah, the inquiry would only be necessary towards the end of the month when the moon rises towards morning.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:2:3)

אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה. מֵאַיֶּלֶת הַשַּׁחַר עַד שֶׁיָּאִיר הַמִּזְרַח אָדָם מְהַלֵּךְ אַרְבָּעַת מִיל. וּמִשֶּׁיָּאִיר הַמִּזְרַח עַד שֶׁתֵּנֵץ הַחַמָּה אָדָם מְהַלֵּךְ אַרְבָּעַת מִיל. וּמְנַיִין שֶׁמֵּאַיֶּלֶת הַשַּׁחַר עַד שֶׁיָּאִיר הַמִּזְרַח אָדָם מְהַלֵּךְ אַרְבָּעַת מִילִין. [שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר] וּכְמוֹ הַשַּׁחַר עָלָה וַיָּאִיצוּ הַמַּלְאָכִים בְּלוֹט לֵאמֹר. מִן סְדוֹם לְצוֹעַר אַרְבָּעָה מִילִין. יְתֵיר הֲווֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעוּרָא. הַמַלְאָךְ הָיָה מְקַדֵּד לִפְנֵיהֶן אֶת הַדֶּרֶךְ. וּמְנַיִין מִשֶּׁיָּאִיר הַמִּזְרַח עַד הַנֵּץ הַחַמָּה אָדָם מְהַלֵּךְ אַרְבָּעַת מִיל. כְּמוֹ וּכְמוֹ. מִילָּה דַמְיָא לַחֲבֵירָתָהּ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
²² 1:1 (Notes 63–70) and *Gen. rabba* 50(15). Rebbi Ḥanina said: From the appearance of the “morning hind”²³ until the first rays of light in the East a man can walk four mil²⁴ on a full day at the equinoxes, this comes to 72 min.. From the first rays of light in the East until sunrise a man can walk four mil²⁵ 94a,. From where do we know that from the appearance of “the morning hind” until the first rays of light on the East there are four mil? [since it is written]²⁶ 19:15.: *and when the morning came, the angels urged Lot, saying*²⁷ and *Gen. rabba,* which states that Lot arrived in Zoar at the time of sunrise.*.* From Sodom to Zoar there are four mil. It is farther than that²⁸ 93b, R. Ḥanina is quoted that he checked out the distance and it was 5 *mil.*. Rebbi Zeˋira said: the angel was flattening the road before them. And from where that from the first rays of light in the East until sunrise there are four mil? When, *and when,* one thing compares to another²⁹ permits to compare the one time specified in Scripture to the other, the time between visibility of the zodiacal light and first dawn. .

footnotes:
²² A somewhat garbled version of a text in Berakhot
²³ The zodiacal light.
²⁴ Since a person is presumed to be able to walk 40 mil
²⁵ Babli Pesaḥim
²⁶ Gen.
²⁷ It is clear that the argument is not relevant to the question asked here, but to the time elapsing between first dawn and sunrise. To complete the proof, one has to add a reference to v. 23, found in Berakhot
²⁸ In the Babli, Pesaḥim
²⁹ The additional and


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:2:4)

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. הָדָא אַיַּלְתָּא דְשַׁחֲרָא. מָאן דְּאָמַר. כּוֹכַבְתָּא הִיא. טָעֵי. זִימְנִין דְּהִיא מְקַדְמָה וְזִימְנִין דְּהִיא מְאַחֲרָה. מַאי כְדוֹן. כְּמִין תְּרֵין דֻּקַרְנִין דִּנְהוֹר דְּסָלְקִין מִן מַדִּינְחָא וּמְנָהֲרִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
³⁰Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: Anybody who identifies the “morning hind” with the planet Venus is in error; that planet sometimes is too early and sometimes too late³¹. What is it? It is like two double horns of light that arise from the East and illuminate.

footnotes:
³⁰ This and the following paragraph also are from Berakhot.
³¹ Sometimes Venus sets still during the night and sometimes it still is seen after sunrise.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:2:5)

[דִּלֹמָא. רִבִּי חִיָיא רוֹבָא וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן חֲלַפְתָּא הֲווּ מְהַלְּכִין בְּהָדָא בִקְעַת אַרְבֵּל בַּקְּרִיצְתָּה רָאוּ אַיֶּלֶת הַשַּׁחַר שֶׁבָּקַע אוֹרָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי חִיָא רוֹבָה לְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן חֲלַפְתָּא. בִּרְבִּי. כָּךְ הִיא גְאולָּתָן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל. בַּתְּחִילָּה קִימְעָא קִימְעָא. כָּל שֶׁהִיא הוֹלֶכֶת הִיא הוֹלֶכֶת וּמֵאִיר. מַאי טַעֲמָא. כִּי יוֹשֵׁב בַּחשֶׁךְ יְי אוֹר לִי. כַּךְ בַּתְּחִילָּה וּמָרְדֳּכַי יוֹשֵׁב בְּשַׁעַר הַמֶּלֶךְ. וְאָחַר כָּךְ וַיָּשָׁב מָרְדֳּכַי אֶל שַׁעַר הַמֶּלֶךְ. וְאָחַר כָּךְ וַיִּקַּח הָמָן אֶת הַלְּבוּשׁ וְאֶת הַסּוּס. וְאָחַר כָּךְ וּמָרְדֳּכַי יָצָא מִלִּפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ בִּלְבוּשׁ מַלְכוּת. וְאָחַר כָּךְ לַיְּהוּדִים הָיְתָה אוֹרָה וְשִׂמְחָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
³² text, not from *Berakhot.* In *Berakhot* the quotes from *Esther* make sense, v. 6:11 preceding 6:12. The paragraph also is copied in *Qonteros Aḥaron*(Q, Chapter 1, Note 44; p. 311) which also quotes 6:12 before v 6:11. The text of Q is identical with that given here except that the Aramaic endings are ה not א; babylonized spelling is to be expected from all correctors.[Explanation³³: The great Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Simeon ben Halaphta were walking in the valley of Arbela before morning and saw “the morning hind” that started radiating. The great Rebbi Ḥiyya said to Rebbi Simeon ben Halaphta: Great man, so will be the deliverance of Israel; it starts out very small and grows and radiates as it goes on. What is the reason ³⁴ 7:8.*When he*³⁵*shall dwell in darkness, the Eternal is my light.* So also at the start ³⁶ 2:21.*Mordocai was sitting at the king’s gate.”* After that ³⁷6:12.*Mordocai returned to the king’s gate.* After that ³⁸6:11.*Haman took the garment and the horse.* After that: ³⁹ 8:15.*Mordocai left the king’s presence in royal garb.* After that: ⁴⁰ 8:16.*The Jews had light and joy.*]

footnotes:
³² This paragraph was added to the ms. by a corrector. While there is no logical necessity for the addition of this text, it is copied from a Yoma
³³ Greek δήλωμα.
³⁴ Micha
³⁵ In the biblical text: I.
³⁶ Esth.
³⁷ Esth.
³⁸ Esth.
³⁹ Esth.
⁴⁰ Esth.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:2:6)

תַּנֵּי. כֹּהֵן שֶׁיָּצָא לְדַבֵּר עִם חֲבֵירוֹ. אִם לְהַפְלִיג טָעוּן טְבִילָה. אִם לְשָׁעָה טָעוּן קִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם. וּסְ[מִ]יכָה לֹא שָׁעָה קַלָּה הִיא. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא סְ[מִ]יכָה . שֶׁעָשׂוּ אוֹתָהּ כְּהֶפְלֵג.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It was stated⁴² 20b, Yerushalmi *Kilaim* 9:2 Notes 47–48.: “A Cohen who left to speak with another person, if to go a distance, he needs immersion⁴³; if for a short time he needs sanctification of hands and legs⁴⁴. But is defecation not for a short time? There is a difference for defecation since they treat it as if going a distance.

footnotes:
⁴² Tosephta 1:16, Babli Zevaḥim
⁴³ As requited by Mishnah 3.
⁴⁴ Since when he returns he starts his service anew; cf. Chapter 2 Note 51.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:2:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:2:7)

תַּנֵּי. יָשֵׁן טָעוּן טְבִילָה. נִתְנַמְנֵם טָעוּן קִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִים. וְיָשֵׁן טָעוּן טְבִילָה. לֹא כֵן תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. לֹא הָיְתָה יְשִׁיבָה בָעֲזָרָה אֶלָּא לָמַלְכֵי בֵית דָּוִד בִּלְבַד. וְאָמַר רִבִּי אִמִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. אַף לָמַלְכֵי בֵית דָּוִד לֹא הָיְתָה יְשִׁיבָה בָעֲזָרָה. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁסָּמַךְ עַצְמוֹ לַכּוֹתֶל וְיָשֵׁן לוֹ. וְהָא כְתִיב וַיָּבֹא הַמֶּלֶךְ דָּוִד וַיֵּשֶׁב לִפְנֵי יְי. אָמַר רִבִּי אַיְיבוֹ בַּר נַגָּרִי. יִישֶׁב עַצְמוֹ בִתְפִילָּה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It was stated: A person sleeping needs immersion, being drowsy needs sanctification of hands and legs. Does a person sleeping need immersion? Did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state⁴⁵ 40b,41b; *Qiddušin* 78b; *Sanhedrin* 101b; *Tamid* 27b. Yerushalmi *Pesaḥim* 5:12 (Note 247), *Sotah*7:7 (Note 219)., “there was no sitting in the Temple courtyard except for the kings of the Davidic dynasty;” and Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, even for the kings of the Davidic dynasty there was no sitting in the Temple courtyard. Explain it that somebody was supporting himself on a wall and sleeping. But is it not written⁴⁶. 7:18., *King David came and sat before the Eternal?* Rebbi Ayvo bar Naggari said, he concentrated in prayer⁴³.

footnotes:
⁴⁵ Babli 25a,69b; Sotah
⁴⁶ 2S
⁴³ As required by Mishnah 3.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:3:1)

**משנה:** אֵין אָדָם נִכְנָס לָעֲזָרָה לָעֲבוֹדָה אֲפִילּוּ טָהוֹר עַד שֶׁיִּטְבּוֹל. חָמֵשׁ טְבִילוֹת וַעֲשָׂרָה קִדּוּשִׁין טוֹבֵל כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל וּמְקַדֵּשׁ בּוֹ בַיּוֹם וְכֻלָּם בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ בֵּית הַפַּרְוָה חוּץ מִזּוֹ בִלְבָד:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Nobody enters the courtyard to serve, even if he was pure, unless he immerses himself. Five immersions and ten sanctifications did the High Priest immerse himself and sanctify on that day, and all of them in the Sanctuary in the Parwa house⁴⁸, except this one alone⁴⁹ on the Temple Mount but outside the sacred domain.

footnotes:
⁴⁸ A subterranean cave inside the walls enclosing the sacred domain. The Babli declares “Parwa” to be the name of a magus or sorcerer.
⁴⁹ Since the Mishnah states that nobody can enter the sacred domain for service unless he immersed himself in water outside the sacred domain, it is obvious that before serving the High Priest also must immerse himself in a miqweh


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:3:2)

**הלכה:** כֵּינִי מַתְנִיתַה. לֹא הָיָה אָדָם נִכְנָס לָעֲזָרָה וְלָעֲבוֹדָה [אֲפִילּוּ טָהוֹר] עַד שֶׁהוּא טוֹבֵל. לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר לַעֲבוֹדָה אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ שֶׁלֹּא לַעֲבוֹדָה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** So is the Mishnah: No person did enter the courtyard or for service⁵⁰, [even if he was pure,] unless he immerses himself. Not only for service but also not for service.

footnotes:
⁵⁰ Nobody, Cohen or lay person, could enter the sacred domain without ablution. But the Cohen who entered not for service could not start to serve until he underwent a second immersion.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:3:3)

שָׁאֲלוּ אֶת בֶּן זוֹמָא. מַה מָקוֹם לִטְבִילָה זוֹ. אָמַר לָהֶם. מַה אִם בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא נִכְנָס מִקּוֹדֶשׁ לַקּוֹדֶשׁ טָעוּן טְבִילָה. מִחוֹל לַקּוֹדֶשׁ כָּל שֶׁכֵּן. [לֹא צוֹרְכָה דְלָא מִקּוֹדֶשׁ לַקּוֹדֶשׁ] לֹא יְהֵא טָעוּן טְבִילָה. מִחוֹל לַקּוֹדֶשׁ יְהֵא טָעוּן טְבִילָה. אָמַר רִבִּי שַׁמַּי. וְכֵינִי. מַה אִם מִקּוֹדֶשׁ לַקּוֹדֶשׁ שֶׁאֵינוּ עֲנוּשׁ כָּרֵת טָעוּן טְבִילָה. מִחוֹל לַקּוֹדֶשׁ שֶׁהוּא עֲנוּשׁ כָּרֵת לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן יְהֵא טָעוּן טְבִילָה. וְאֲפִילוּ מִקּוֹדֶשׁ לַקּוֹדֶשׁ יְהֵא עֲנוּשׁ כָּרֵת. כַּיי דְתַנִּינָן תַּמְּן. הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁהָא כְּדֵי הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה. עַד כַּמָּה הִיא שִׁיעוּר הִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה. רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֵּן לֵוִי. [עַד כְּדֵי] וַיִּכְרְעוּ אַפַּיִם אַרְצָה עַל הָרִצְפָה וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ מוֹסִיף עַד וְהוֹדוֹת לַיי כִּי טוֹב. רִבִּי מָנָא מוֹסִיף. עַד כִּי לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
They asked Ben Zoma, where does this immersion come from⁵¹? He said to them, since when he enters the holy from the holy he needs immersion⁵², from profane to holy so much more? It is not necessary, but from holy to holy he should not need immersion⁵³, from profane to holy he should need immersion⁵⁴. Rebbi Shammai said, it is the following. Since from holy to holy where he is not subject to extirpation⁵⁵ 2:4.) he needs immersion, from profane to holy where he is subject to extirpation⁵⁶ not so much more that he should need immersion? And even from holy to holy he should be subject to extirpation, following what we have stated there⁵⁷ 2:4.: “If he prostrated himself,or tarried that he could have prostrated himself.⁵⁸” What is the duration of prostration? Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi⁵⁹ 2:4, he gives a much shorter time frame. The criterion given here, the time necessary to recite half or all of the verse, is the one given by the Babli *Ševuot*16b in the name of other Galilean authorities., [as long as] ⁶⁰ 7:3.*they bowed down with their faces on the floor and prostrated themselves.* Rebbi Abbahu adds, *thanking the Eternal for He is good,* Rebbi Mana adds, *His grace is forever.*

footnotes:
⁵¹ Which does not seem to be biblical.
⁵² As stated later in the Mishnah, if the High Priest changes from his 8 garments used for service outside to white garments used inside the Sanctuary he both immerses himself and sanctifies hands and legs.
⁵³ Since he already immersed himself at the start of the service.
⁵⁴ This would be an answer to the question asked at the start of the paragraph, but it is contradicted by the later Mishnaiot.
⁵⁵ If he is pure when entering the Sanctuary but becomes impure inside, if he leaves immediately he is not subject to extirpation (Mishnah Ševuot
⁵⁶ If he enters the sacred domain while impure, he is subject to extirpation.
⁵⁷ Mishnah Ševuot
⁵⁸ While impure, he is subject to extirpation.
⁵⁹ In Ševuot
⁶⁰ 2Chr.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:3:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:3:4)

תַּנֵּי. אְמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. כָּל עַצְמָן לֹא הִתְקִינוּ טְבִילָה זֹו אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי טְבִילַת סֶרֶךְ. שֶׁפְּעָמִים שֶׁאָדָם הוֹלֵךְ לִרְחוֹץ וְהוּא נִזְכָּר קֶרִי יָשָׁן שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּיָדוֹ וְחוֹזֵר וּבָא לֹו. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הַמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת שֶׁרָאָת נִדָּה צְרִיכִין טְבִילָה. רִבִּי יוּדָה פּוֹטֵר. מַה חָלַק רִבִּי יוּדָה. עַל טְבִילַת סֶרֶךְ. אוֹ מִשֵּׁם אֲפִילוּ טוֹבֵל מַהוּ מוֹעִיל. מַה נְפַק מִינָּהּ. רָאָה קֶרִי. אִין תֵּימַר. חָלוּק רִבִּי יוּדָה עַל טְבִילַת סֶרֶךְ. דְּבַר תּוֹרָה הוּא. אִין תֵּימַר. אֲפִילוּ טוֹבֵל מַהוּ מוֹעִיל. מוֹעִיל הוּא שֶׁהוּא טוֹבֵל. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. אְמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. כָּל עַצְמָן לֹא הִתְקִינוּ טְבִילָה זוֹ אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי טְבִילַת סֶרֶךְ. שֶׁפְּעָמִים שֶׁאָדָם הוֹלֵךְ לִרְחוֹץ וְהוּא נִזְכָּר קֶרִי יָשָׁן שֶׁבְּיָדוֹ וְחוֹזֵר וּבָא לוֹ. [הָדָא אָמְרָה] לֹא חָלַק רִבִּי יְהוּדָה עַל טְבִילַת סֶרֶךְ אֶלָּא מִשֵׁם אֲפִילוּ טוֹבֵל מַה הוּא מוֹעִיל.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It was stated: ⁶³ Rebbi Jehudah says, they instituted this immersion only as immersion of discipline, for sometimes when a person goes to wash he remembers an old emission of semen which he had and turns back⁶⁴ and to enter the sacred domain. Immersion in a *miqweh* will remove the impurity but the disability regarding *sancta* and the sacred domain is removed only by the following sundown (*Lev.* 22:7). Therefore immersion in the morning is only for pure persons; for R. Jehudah it is instituted so people should not inadvertently enter the sacred domain while still not qualified for it.. There, we have stated⁶⁵ 3:6. The Mishnah is truncated; the full text explains the plural form of the verb: “The person with gonorrhea who had an emission of semen, as well as a menstruating woman who lost semen, and the woman who started menstruating while having intercourse, need immersion, but Rebbi Jehudah declares them not liable.”
An emission of semen pollutes, but it is a minor impurity which is removed by immersion in water and, for *sancta,* the following sundown. But gonorrhea and menstruation cause severe impurity for which immersion is possible only after seven days (*Lev.* 15:13,19). An immersion because of emission, before the time where immersion for the severe impurity is possible, is totally ineffective.
A different version of the following discussion is in *Berakhot* 3:6, Notes 260–264.: “the woman who started menstruating while having intercourse, needs immersion, but Rebbi Jehudah declares them not liable.” Why does Rebbi Jehudah disagree? Is it about immersion of discipline or because even if he immerses himself what would be its use? What is the difference? If he⁶⁶ had an emission. If you say that Rebbi Jehudah disagrees about immersion of discipline, it is a word of the Torah⁶⁷ 15:16.. If you say, even if he immerses himself, what would be its use? It is useful that he immerse himself, as it was stated, Rebbi Jehudah says, they instituted this immersion only as immersion of discipline, for sometimes when a person goes to wash he remembers an old emission of semen which he had and turns back. This implies that Rebbi Jehudah did not disagree about immersion of discipline but because even if he immerses himself, what would be its use?

footnotes:
⁶³ Babli 30a.
⁶⁴ In itself this immersion is useless. If a person actually is impure, he is forbidden to partake of sancta
⁶⁵ Mishnah Berakhot
⁶⁶ The male sufferer from gonorrhea, mentioned in the Mishnah. He had an emission before he started suffering from gonorrhea. He was obligated for an immersion before he became severely impure.
⁶⁷ Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:4:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:4:1)

**משנה:** פֵּרְשׂוּ סָדִין שֶׁל בּוּץ בֵּינוֹ לְבֵין הָעָם פָּשַׁט יָרַד וְטָבַל עָלָה וְנִסְתַּפָּג. הֵבִיאוּ לוֹ בִגְדֵי זָהָב וְלָבַשׁ וְקִידֵּשׁ יָדָיו וְרַגְלָיו. הֵבִיאוּ לוֹ אֶת הַתָּמִיד. קְרָצוֹ וּמֵירֵק אַחֵר שְׁחִיטָה עַל יָדוֹ. קִבֵּל אֶת דָּמוֹ וּזְרָקוֹ. נִכְנַס לְהַקְטִיר אֶת הַקְּטוֹרֶת לְהֵטִיב אֶת הַנֵּרוֹת לְהַקְרִיב אֶת הָרֹאשׁ וְאֶת הָאֵיבָרִים וְאֶת הַחֲבִיתִּין וְאֶת הַיָּיִן:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** They spread a byssus sheet⁶¹ between him and the people; he undressed, stepped down, and immersed himself, came up and dried himself with a towel. They brought him the golden garments⁶², and he dressed, and sanctified hands and legs.
They brought him the daily sacrifice; he cut it,⁶⁸ and another completed the slaughter for him. He received the blood and poured it. He entered to burn the incense, to clean the lights, to sacrifice⁶⁹ the head, the limbs, the pan-baked breads, and the wine.

footnotes:
⁶¹ The same material from which the white garments are made which the High Priest wears for the special functions on the Day of Atonement.
⁶² The eight garments which the High Priest wears all year long, of which the diadem was pure gold and the coat, belt, and breast-shield contained gold.
⁶⁸ Since the entire service of the Day of Atonement has to be performed by the High Priest himself, he has a problem in that he has to slaughter the sheep (and later the other sacrifices) while at the same time receiving the blood, which has to be that pumped out by the heart, not what is flowing out later. Therefore he has to cut the legal minimum, throat and esophagus, and let another Cohen cut the carotid arteries, which action, while necessary for the slaughter, does not formally fall under the definition of שחט “to cut the throat”.
⁶⁹ On the large altar in the inner courtyard, outside the sanctuary/


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:4:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:4:2)

**הלכה:** רִבִּי לָעְזָר בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁחוֹט בּוֹ שְׁנַיִם אוֹ רוֹב שְׁנַיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. מַתְנִיתָה אָמְרָה כֵן. [הֵבִיאוּ לוֹ אֶת הַתָּמִיד.] קְרָצוֹ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah: Until he cut two or most of two⁷⁰. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah says so, “[they brought him the daily sacrifice;] he cut it.”

footnotes:
⁷⁰ “Two” is the technical term for windpipe and esophagus, see Note 68. Babli 32b


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:4:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:4:3)

כָּתוּב קֶרֶץ מִצָּפֹון בָּא בָהּ. רִבִּי חֲנִינָה וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. חַד אָמַר נְכוֹסָה. וְחוֹרָנָה אָמַר. נְסוֹחָה. מָאן דְּאָמַר. נְכוֹסָא. מִן הָדָא. הֵבִיאוּ לֹו אֶת הַתָּמִיד. קְרָצוֹ. מָאן דְּאָמַר. נְסוֹחָה. מַגְלִיָינָא. מֵחוֹמֶר קוֹרַצְתִּי גַם אָנִי.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It is written⁷¹ 46:20 (Babli 32b)., *qeresò from the North comes into it.* Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi. One said, a butcher; but the other said, a remover. He who said, a butcher, from this, “they brought him the daily sacrifice; he cut it.” He who said, a remover, an exiler, *from loam I also was cut off*⁷² 33:6. Hebrew קרץ may represent both قرص “to pinch, tweak, sting” and قرض “sever, cut off, clip”.*.*

footnotes:
⁷¹ Jer.
⁷² Job


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:5:1)

**משנה:** קְטוֹרֶת שֶׁל שַׁחַר הָיְתָה קְרֵיבָה בֵּין דָּם לָאֵיבָרִים שֶׁל בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם הָיְתָה קְרֵיבָה בֵּין אֵיבָרִים לַנְּסָכִים. אִם הָיָה כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל זָקֵן אוֹ אַיסְטְנֵיס מְחַמִּין לוֹ חַמִּין וּמַטִּילִין לְתוֹךְ הַצּוֹנֵן כְּדֵי שֶׁתָּפוּג צִנָּתָן:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** The incense in the morning⁷³ was brought between blood and limbs; in the evening it was brought between limbs and libations⁷⁴. If the High Priest was old or asthenic⁷⁵, one heats water for him⁷⁶ and pours into the cold water to mitigate its coldness.

footnotes:
⁷³ Not only on the day of Atonement but every day of the year.
⁷⁴ Not only libation but also the flour offering.
⁷⁵ Greek ἀσθενής.
⁷⁶ On the preceding day since cooking or heating is forbidden on the day of Atonement.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:5:2)

**הלכה:** כָּתוּב בְּתָמִיד בַבּוֹקֶר וְכָתוּב בָּעֵצִים בַבּוֹקֶר. יִקְדֹּום דָּבָר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בּוֹ בַּבּוֹקֶר בַּבּוֹקֶר לְדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר בּוֹ אֶלָּא בַבּוֹקֶר [אֶחָד]. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ לְדָמוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי הִילָא. תַּעֲשֶׂה. הִקְדִּים בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה. כָּתוּב בַבּוֹקֶר בְּתָמְִיד. וְכָתוּב בַּקְּטוֹרֶת בַּבּוֹקֶר בַּבּוֹקֶר. יִקְדֹּום דָּבָר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בּוֹ בַּבּוֹקֶר בַּבּוֹקֶר לְדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר בּוֹ אֶלָּא בַבּוֹקֶר. מַה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם לָאֵיבָרִין. וַהֲלֹא כְּעֵצִים הֵן. אֶלָּא כִי נָן קַיָימִין. אֲפִילוּ לְדָמוֹ. כָּתוּב בָּעֵצִים בַבּוֹקֶר בַבּוֹקֶר. וְכָתוּב בַּקְּטוֹרֶת בַּבּוֹקֶר בַּבּוֹקֶר. וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן יִקְדֹּום. מִי מַכְשִׁיר אֶת מִי. עֵצִים מַכְשִׁירִין אֶת הַקְּטוֹרֶת. אַף הֵם יְקַדְּמוּ אֶת הַקְּטוֹרֶת. אִיתָא חֲמִי. עֵצִים קוֹדְמִין אֶת הַדָּם וְהַדָּם קוֹדֵם לַקְּטוֹרֶת. וְתֵימַר הָכֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי הִילָא. לֹא. עַל שֶׁלֹּא זָכִיתִי בוֹ מִן הַדִּין. שֶׁהָעֵצִים מַכְשִׁירִין אֶת הַקְּטוֹרֶת. וְאַצְרַכְתְּ הָדָא מַתְנִיתָא. הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מִי מַכְשִׁיר אֶת הַקְּטוֹרֶת. גְּחָלִים. אָמַר רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. מַעֲלֶה עָשָׁן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** It is written about the daily sacrifice *in the morning*⁷⁷ 29:39; *Num.* 28:4.*,* and it is written about wood *in the morning*⁷⁸ 6:5, referring to the two wooden logs which have to be ceremoniously put into the fire every morning. While this is not mentioned in the Mishnah, the presentation and arrangement of the two logs also is an obligation of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement.*.* Something about which is written *in the morning, in the morning,* shall precede something about which *in the morning* is written only once. Then even before its blood? Rebbi Hila said, *you shall do*⁷⁷ 29:39; *Num.* 28:4.*,* preceded action for it⁷⁹. It is written about the daily sacrifice *in the morning,* and it is written about incense *in the morning, in the morning*⁸⁰ 30:7.*.* Something about which is written *in the morning, in the morning,* shall precede something about which only [one] *in the morning* is written. Where do we hold? If about limbs, are they not like wood⁸¹? But we are holding, even for its blood. It is written about wood *in the morning, in the morning,* and it is written about incense *in the morning, in the morning,* and I do not know which of the two is preceding. Which one is enabling what? Wood enables the incense; the wood shall precede the incense⁸² 2(8).. Come and see, wood precedes the blood and blood precedes incense, and you are saying so? Rebbi Hila said, no. Since I could not prove by a logical argument that wood enables the incense, you needed that *baraita.* They wanted to say, what enables the incense? Charcoal. Rebbi Eleazar said, smoke-creating herb⁸³.

footnotes:
⁷⁷ Ex.
⁷⁸ This has to read: in the morning, in the morning; Lev.
⁷⁷ Ex.
⁷⁹ The slaughter and the dissection of the daily sacrifice are not done on the altar; they are not covered by any argument about the number of “mornings” quoted. They have to be done as early as possible in the morning (and as late as possible in the evening.)
⁸⁰ Ex.
⁸¹ They are to be burned on the altar; they can be considered fuel of the altar.
⁸² Sifra Ṣaw Pereq
⁸³ Cf. Chapter 2, Note 227.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:5:3)

נֶאֱמַר בְּתָמִיד בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם וְנֶאֱמַר בֵּקְטוֹרֶת בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם. סְמַךְ לַנֵּרוֹת. (וְלֹא) [וְנֶאֱמַר] בַּנֵּרוֹת מֵעֶרֶב וְעַד בּוֹקֶר. יוּאְחַר דָּבָר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בּוֹ בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם סְמַךְ לַנֵּירוֹת לְדָבָר שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר בּוֹ אֶלָּא בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם. מֵעַתַּה אֲפִילוּ לִּנְסָכִין. אָמַר רִבִּי הִילָא. תַּעֲשֶׂה. אִיחַר בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה. רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי הִילָא. הָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. תַּעֲשֶׂה. הִקְדִּים בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה. וָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. תַּעֲשֶׂה. אִיחַר בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה. אָמַר רִבִּי הִילָא. כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד כְּעִנְיָינוֹ. תָּמִיד שֶׁלָשַׁחַר בִּכְלַל מְאוּחָר הָיָה. מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר תַּעֲשֶׂה. הִקְדִּים בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה. תָּמִיד שֶׁלָבֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם בִּכְלַל מוּקְדָּם הָיָה. מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר תַּעֲשֶׂה. אִיחַר בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה. וַהֲוָה רִבִּי זְעוּרָה מְקַלֵּס לֵיהּ וְצָוַוח לֵיהּ בְּנֵיהָ דְאוֹרַיְתָא.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It says for the afternoon daily sacrifice, *in the evening*⁷⁷ 29:39; *Num.* 28:4.*,* and it says about incense, *in the evening,* close to the lights⁸⁴ 30:8: *When Aaron kindles the light in the evening he shall burn incense on it* i. e., on the interior altar.. (Not) [You say] about the lights, *from evening to morning*⁸⁵ 27:21.(?)[.] A matter where it is said *in the evening* close to the lights shall be delayed after a matter where only *in the evening* is said. Then even after the libations? Rebbi Hila said, *you shall do*⁷⁷ 29:39; *Num.* 28:4.*,* delayed action for it⁸⁶. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Hila: Here you are saying, *“you shall do,* preceded action for it”, and there you are saying, *“you shall do,* delayed action for it”? Rebbi Hila said, each one according to its subject. The daily morning sacrifice was shown to be later; *you shall do,* preceded action for it. The daily evening sacrifice was shown to be earlier, the verse says *you shall do,* delayed action for it. Rebbi Zeˋira acclaimed⁸⁷ him and called him “son of the Torah.”

footnotes:
⁷⁷ Ex.
⁸⁴ Ex.
⁸⁵ Ex.
⁷⁷ Ex.
⁸⁶ By an argument parallel to that of Note 79.
⁸⁷ A Semitic adaptation of Greek καλόω.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:5:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:5:4)

תַּנֵּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. עֲשָׁתוֹת שֶׁלְבַּרְזֶל הָיוּ מַרְתִּיחִין אוֹתָן מֵעֶרֶב יוֹם הַכִּיּפּוּרִים וּמַטִּילִין לְתוֹךְ הַצּוֹנִין כְּדֵי שֶּׁתָּפוּג צִינָּתָן. וְלֹא נִמְצָא כִמְכַבֶּה בְּיוֹם הַכִּיּפּוּרִים. אֶלָּא מִסְבּוֹר סְבַר רִבִּי יוּדָה שֶׁאֵין אָבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת בְּיוֹם הַכִּיּפּוּרִים. אֶלָּא רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. לֹא כֵן סְבַר מֵימוֹר. רִבִּי יֹוסֵי וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁנֵיהֶן אָמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. נֵימַר. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁלָשְׁתָּן אָמְרוּ דָבָר אֶחָד. אֶלָּא מִיסְבּוֹר סְבַר רִבִּי יוּדָה שֶׁאֵין תּוֹלְדַת הָאֵשׁ כְּאֵשׁ. אֶלָּא כֵינִי. רִבִּי יוּדָה סְבַר מֵימַר שֶׁאֵין תּוֹלְדַת אֵשׁ כְּאֵשׁ. וְרַבָּנִן סָבְרִין מֵימַר. תּוֹלְדַת אֵשׁ כְּאֵשׁ. וְיֵחַם לֹו חַמִּין. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בַּר אֶבְיוֹן רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אִינָיָינִי בֵּן סוֹסַיי. טָעֲמָא דְהָדֵין תַּנָּיָיא. שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ אוֹמְרִים. רְאִינוּ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל טוֹבֵל בְּמַים שְׁאוּבִין בְּיוֹם הַכִּיּפּוּרִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It was stated⁸⁸: Rebbi Jehudah says, iron bars they were heating on the eve of the Day of atonement which they dropped into the water to mitigate its cold. Would he be not like a person who extinguished {fire} on the Day of Atonement⁸⁹? But would Rebbi Jehudah hold that there are no principal categories of work on Sabbath⁹⁰ 16:29) as on the Sabbath.? But Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon must have said the same⁹¹ Chapter 2, Note 19.. Were we not of the opinion that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon said the same⁹² Chapter 2, Note 148. Babli *Šabbat*31b*.*? Let us say that Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Jehudah, and Rebbi Simeon, said the same⁹³ that R. Jehudah disagrees.! But Rebbi Jehudah must think that derivatives of fire are not like fire, and the rabbis think that derivatives of fire are like fire. Could one not heat water⁹⁴? Rebbi Joshua bar Abin, Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Anyani bar Sosai: The reason of this Tanna, that they should not say, we saw the High Priest immersing himself in drawn water⁹⁵ cannot be filled with drawn water; 3 *log* of drawn water invalidate a *miqweh* of 40 *seah* (960 *log*), Mishnah *Miqwaot* 2:4. on the Day of Atonement.

footnotes:
⁸⁸ Babli 34b.
⁸⁹ Presuming that the iron still was really hot by next morning. The Babli holds that the problem is that sudden cooling of iron bars is a step in the production of steel and as such forbidden on the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement, but in this case where the bars have been stored for an entire night the prohibition would only be rabbinic, which is not applied in the Temple.
⁹⁰ But on the Day of Atonement all work is forbidden (Lev.
⁹¹ R. Simeon holds that an action whose forbidden aspect was not intended is not forbidden on the Sabbath; cf. Šabbat
⁹² Šabbat
⁹³ But we know from Mishnah Šabbat
⁹⁴ Which may be poured into cold water on the Sabbath according to everybody.
⁹⁵ A miqweh


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:1)

**משנה:** הֱבִיאוּהוּ לְבֵית הַפַּרְוָה וּבַקּוֹדֶשׁ הָיָתָה. פֵּרְסוּ סָדִין שֶׁל בּוּץ בֵּינוֹ לְבֵין הָעָם. קִידֵּשׁ יָדָיו וְרַגְלָיו וּפָשַׁט. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר פָּשַׁט קִידֵּשׁ יָדָיו וְרַגְלָיו. יָרַד וְטָבַל עָלָה וְנִסְתַּפָּג. הֵבִיאוּ לוֹ בִגְדֵי לָבָן וְלָבַשׁ וְקִידֵּשׁ יָדָיו וְרַגְלָיו: בַּשַּׁחַר הָיָה לוֹבֵשׁ פִּילּוּסִין שֶׁל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר מְנָה וּבֵין הָעַרְבַּיִם הִינְדְּוָון שֶׁל שְׁמוֹנֶה מֵאוֹת זוּז דִּבְרֵי רֵבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים בַּשַּׁחַר הָיָה לָבוּשׁ פִּילּוּסִים שֶׁל שְׁמוֹנָה עָשָׂר מְנָה. וּבֵין הָעַרְבַּיִם שֶׁל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר מְנָה הַכֹּל שְׁלשִׁים מְנָה. אֵילּוּ נוֹטֵל מִן הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ וְאִם רָצָה לְהוֹסִיף מוֹסִיף מִשֶּׁלּוֹ:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** They brought him to the Parwa house⁴⁸, which was in the sacred domain. They spread a byssus sheet⁶¹ between him and the people; he sanctified hands and legs and undressed; Rebbi Meïr says, he undressed and sanctified hands and legs. He stepped down, and immersed himself, came up and dried himself with a towel. They brought him the white garments⁹⁶ 16:4., he dressed and sanctified hands and legs.
In the morning he was wearing Pelusian¹³² worth twelve *mina,* and in the evening Indian¹³³ was 100 *denar (drachma);* 30 *mina* = 3’000 silver *denar.* For first Century prices, this seems excessive, but the examples given later exclude the possibility that the data might be second Century re-interpretations. In Mishnah *Peah* 8:8 it is stated that a fortune of 200 *denar* disqualifies its owner from receiving welfare. of 800 *denar,* the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, in the morning he was wearing Pelusian worth eighteen *mina* and in the evening of twelve *mina,* all together thirty *mina*¹³⁴*.* This he takes from Temple property; if he wants to add, he adds from his own.

footnotes:
⁴⁸ A subterranean cave inside the walls enclosing the sacred domain. The Babli declares “Parwa” to be the name of a magus or sorcerer.
⁶¹ The same material from which the white garments are made which the High Priest wears for the special functions on the Day of Atonement.
⁹⁶ The four garments (coat, slacks, belt, and turban) made of byssus required for all expiatory acts on the Day of Atonement, Lev.
¹³² Linen manufactured in Pelusium, the most expensive kind on the market.
¹³³ A mina
¹³⁴ Then why does the Mishnah not require second quality Pelusian linen for the afternoon service?


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:2)

**הלכה:** מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי מֵאִיר. פָּשַׁט וְקִידֵּשׁ וְרָחַץ וְקִידֵּשׁ. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרַבָּנִן. וּפָשַׁט וְלָבַשׁ. הִקִּישׁ פְּשִׁיטָה לִלְבִישָׁה. מַה לְבִישָׁה מְקַדֵּשׁ אַף פְּשִׁיטָה מְקַדֵּשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוּדָן. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר רְחִיצָה חוֹצֶצֶת. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִסְבּוֹר אַתְּ סְבוֹר. עַל דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. וּפָשַׁט וְקִידֵּשׁ וְרָחַץ וְקִידֵּשׁ. אֵינָהּ כֵּן אֶלָּא וּפָשַׁט וְקִידֵּשׁ וְרָחַץ וְלָבַשׁ וְקִידֵּשׁ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? *He undressed* and sanctified, *and he washed* and sanctified.⁹⁷ 16:23–24, where at the end of the expiatory service Aaron is commanded first to take off his byssus garments, then to wash (immerse himself), and then to dress in the High Priest’s garb for the ordinary afternoon service.. What is the rabbi’s reason? *And he undressed, and he dressed.* It tied undressing to dressing⁹⁸ 6(6) and here in Halakhah 7:3, Babli 71a. It says in *Lev.* 16:23, *he shall take off the linen garments which he wore.* Since nobody can take off clothing which he does not wear, the reference is taken to v. 4 where Aaron is commanded *to wash his flesh in water and wear them.* Therefore all procedures connected with dressing are required for undressing, in the same order.. Since for dressing he sanctifies, so for undressing he sanctifies. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yudan, does washing separate in Rebbi Meïr’s opinion⁹⁹? He said to him, you think that Rebbi Meïr’s reason is, *and he undressed* and sanctified, *and he washed* and sanctified.. It is not so, but *and he undressed* and sanctified, *and he washed and dressed* and sanctified.

footnotes:
⁹⁷ The argument is about Lev.
⁹⁸ The argument is more explicit in Sifra Aḥare Pereq
⁹⁹ As formulated at the beginning, the second sanctification is tied to washing, not to dressing. This is unreasonable.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:3)

שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. אַחַת פִּשּׁוּט וְאַחַת לְבוּשׁ שְׁתֵּיהֶן לָבֹא. בַּר קַפָּרָא אָמַר. אַחַת לָבֹא וְאַחַת לְשֶׁעָבַר שְׁתֵּיהֶן לְבוּשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין בְּקִידּוּשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהוּא לָבֹא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין בְּקִידּוּשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהוּא מְעַכֵּב. מַה טָעֲמָא. חוּקַּת עוֹלָם לְדוֹרוֹתֵיכֶם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין בְּקִידּוּשׁ הָאַחֲרוֹן שֶׁהוּא לְשֶׁעָבַר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. מַתְנִיתָה אָמְרָה כֵן. הֵבִיאוּ לוֹ בִגְדֵי עַצְמוֹ וְלָבַשׁ. וְיֵשׁ אָדָם מְקַדֵּשׁ יָדָיו וְרַגָלָיו לִלְבּוֹשׁ בִּגָדֵי חוֹל. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. וּלְבֵשָׁם. לְבִישָׁה מְעַכֶּבֶת. וְאֵין קִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגָלַיִם מְעַכֵּב. וְדִכְוָותָהּ. לְבִישָׁה מְעַכֶּבֶת. וְאֵין קִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגָלַיִם מְעַכֵּב.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Samuel said, both for undressing and for dressing are for the future¹⁰⁰. Bar Qappara said, one for the future and one for the past, both for dressing¹⁰¹. Rebbi Joḥanan said, everybody agrees that the first sanctification is for the future¹⁰² 30:21. Therefore there is no requirement of sanctification when the High Priest takes off his profane clothing.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, everybody agrees that the first sanctification is obstructive¹⁰³. What is the reason? *An eternal law for your generations*¹⁰⁴ 30:21.*.* Rebbi Joḥanan said, everybody agrees that the last sanctification is for the past. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah¹⁰⁵ says so. “They bring him his own clothing and he dresses.” Does anybody sanctify his hands and legs to wear profane clothing? Rebbi Joḥanan said, *and he shall wear them*¹⁰⁶ 16:4.*.* The dressing is obstructive¹⁰⁷ all four garments enumerated in the verse form an inseparable unit., but sanctification of hands and legs is not obstructive. And similarly, the dressing is obstructive, but sanctification of hands and legs is not obstructive¹⁰⁸ 19b..

footnotes:
¹⁰⁰ The sanctifications at a change of dress are not biblical. According to the reason given for the rabbis’ position, both are intended for the next step in the service.
¹⁰¹ For him, each step in the service needs sanctification before and after. The second sanctification is not for taking off the garments but for the garments he is wearing at the moment of sanctification.
¹⁰² The first sanctification at the start of the morning service is a biblical requirement, Ex.
¹⁰³ Without this sanctification, the High Priest would be disqualified from serving.
¹⁰⁴ A misquote from Ex.
¹⁰⁵ Mishnah 7:4.
¹⁰⁶ Lev.
¹⁰⁷ Obviously he cannot serve naked, but the emphasis is on wear them:
¹⁰⁸ All changes of dress during the day are biblical prescriptions but the accompanying sanctifications (except the first, as stated) are required but their omission does not disqualify. Babli Zevaḥim


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:4)

כדי. שֶׁיְּהוּ כְפוּלִים. וְקִיָימִינָהּ דְּלָא כְרִבִּי יוֹסֵה. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק לָא נְחַת לְבֵית וַועֲדָא. קָם עִם רִבִּי זְעוּרָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מַה חַדְתּוֹן [הֲוָה לְכוֹן בְּבֵי מִדְרָשָׁאַ] יוֹמָא דֵין. [אָמַר לֵיהּ.] בַּד. שֶׁיְּהוּ כְפוּלִים. וְקִיָימִינָהּ דְּלָא כְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. דְּתַנֵּי. וְלִבְנֵי אַהֲרֹן תַּעֲשֶׂה כֻתֳּנוֹת. רַבָּנִן אָמְרֵי. שְׁתֵּי כֻתֳּנוֹת לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר. אֲפִילוּ כֻתּוֹנֶת אַחַת לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרַבָּנִן. וְלִבְנֵי אַהֲרֹן תַּעֲשֶׂה כֻתֳּנוֹת. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. לְמֵאָה בְנֵי אַהֲרֹן תַּעֲשֶׂה כֻתּוֹנֶת. בַּד. שֶׁיְּהוּ חֲדָשִׁים. אִם אוֹמֵר אַתְּ שֶׁלֹּא יִלְבַּשׁ שְׁחָקִים. וְהָא תַנֵּי. וּלְבֵשָׁם. אֲפִילוּ שְׁחָקִים. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יָסָא. כְּמַחֲלוֹקֶת.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
כדי¹⁰⁹ that they should be double¹¹⁰ reported in *Sifra Aḥare Pereq* 1(5), Babli *Zevaḥim* 18b. The word “linen cloth” is repeated four times in *Lev.* 16:4. One of these is necessary to establish that the High Priest has to wear four linen garments; the other three are read to imply that the garments should be of byssus (expensive), new, and double (not transparent, in the Babli’s version, woven from entwined thread.). We determined that this does not follow Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac did not come to the assembly hall. He met Rebbi Zeˋira and asked him, what did you newly find [was for you in the house of study]¹¹¹ on that day? He told him, *linen cloth,* that they should be double. We determined that this does not follow Rebbi Yose¹¹² the discovery of the Amoraim was that the *baratta* cannot be R. Yose’s.. As it was stated, *and for Aaron’s sons you shall make coats*¹¹³. 27:40.*.* The rabbis say, two coats for each one; Rebbi Yose says, even one coat for each one. What is the rabbis’ reason? *And for Aaron’s sons you shall make coats.* What is Rebbi Yose’s reason? Make coats for 100 sons of Aaron. *Linen cloth,* that they should be new¹¹⁰ reported in *Sifra Aḥare Pereq* 1(5), Babli *Zevaḥim* 18b. The word “linen cloth” is repeated four times in *Lev.* 16:4. One of these is necessary to establish that the High Priest has to wear four linen garments; the other three are read to imply that the garments should be of byssus (expensive), new, and double (not transparent, in the Babli’s version, woven from entwined thread.). If you are saying that they should not be worn out, was it not stated, *and he shall wear them*¹⁰⁶ 16:4.*,* even if they are worn out? Rebbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rebbi Yasa, as the disagreement¹¹⁴.

footnotes:
¹⁰⁹ This is misspelled for בד “linen cloth”.
¹¹⁰ This is a discussion of a bardita
¹¹¹ The text in brackets was added by a corrector who did not understand the text. The addition is in the usual Babli style in this situation.
¹¹² Since the discussion centers on a baritta,
¹¹³ Ex
¹¹⁰ This is a discussion of a bardita
¹⁰⁶ Lev.
¹¹⁴ R. Yose (the Tanna) does not accept that the garments have to be new every year. The Babli 12b attributes the disagreement to other Tannaim.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:5)

עוֹר שֶׁעִיבְּדוֹ לְשֵׁם קַמֵּיעַ מוּתָּר לִכְתוֹב עָלָיו מְזוּזָּה. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹסֵר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. הֲוִינָן סָבְרִין מֵימַר. מַה פְלִיגִין. לְהֶדְיוֹט. הָא לַגְּבוֹהַּ לֹא. מִן מַה דְתַנֵּי. אַבְנֵי קוֹדֶשׁ צָרִיךְ שֶׁתְּהֵא חֲצִיבָתָן בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ וּבַקּוֹדֶשׁ יֵחְצָבוּ. בִּגְדֵי קוֹדֶשׁ צָרִיךְ שֶׁתְּהֵא אֲרִיגָתְן בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ וּבַקּוֹדֶשׁ יֵאֶרְגּוּ. וְאָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יָסָא. בְּמַחֲלוֹקֶת הִיא. הָדָא אָמְרָה. אַף לַגָּבוֹהַּ פְּלִיגִין. דְּתַנֵּי. הָעוֹשֶׁה כְלִי לַגָּבוֹהַּ. עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ גָבוֹהַּ מוּתָּר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ הֶדְיוֹט. מִשֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ גָבוֹהַּ אָסוּר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ הֶדְיוֹט. וְהָא תַנֵּי. הָעוֹשֶׁה כְלִי לַגָּבוֹהַּ אַל יִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ הֶדְיוֹט. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יָסָא. כְּמַחֲלוֹקֶת. דְּתַנֵּי. הָעוֹשֶׁה כְלִי לְהֶדְיוֹט. עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ הֶדְיוֹט מוּתָּר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ גָבוֹהַּ. מִשֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ הֶדְיוֹט אָסוּר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ גָבוֹהַּ. וְהָא תַנֵּי. הָעוֹשֶׁה כְלִי לַהֶדְיוֹט. אַל יִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ גָּבוֹהַּ. רִבִּי חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַבָּנִן דְּתַמָּן. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁבָּא מִתְּרוּמַת הַלִּישְׁכָּה. וְלֵית שְׁמַע מִינָּהּ כְּלוּם.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Leather which was tanned for an amulet. It is permitted to write a *mezuza* on it; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel forbids¹¹⁵ is written be especially prepared for sacramental use.. Rebbi Yose said, we were of the opinion that where they disagree is about a private person; therefore not for Heaven. Since it was stated, holy stones have to be quarried in holiness, in holiness they have to be quarried¹¹⁶. Holy garments have to be woven in holiness, in holiness they have to be woven. And Rebbi Ḥaninah said in the name of Rebbi Yasa, this is as the disagreement. This implies that they disagree even for Heaven¹¹⁷9:21., as it was stated: If somebody makes a vessel for Heaven, as long as it was not used for Heaven, a lay person may use it; after it was used for Heaven, a lay person may not use it. But was it not stated, If somebody makes a vessel for Heaven, a lay person may not use it? Rebbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rebbi Yasa, as the disagreement. [As it was stated:]¹¹⁸ If somebody makes a vessel for a lay person, as long as it was not used for a lay person, Heaven may use it; after it was used for a lay person Heaven may not use it. But was it not stated, If somebody makes a vessel for a lay person, Heaven may not use it? Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of the rabbis there: Explain it that it was paid for by the Temple tax¹¹⁹ and you cannot infer anything.

footnotes:
¹¹⁵ Rabban Simeon requires that the parchment on which the mezuza
¹¹⁶ The duplication means that the stones (of the High Priest’s breastplate) have to be quarried (and later, the priestly garment to be woven) with the intention to produce sacred utensils.
¹¹⁷ For use in the Temple. Tosephta Menaḥot
¹¹⁸ The text in parentheses was added by a corrector who did not understand the text. The following text is not quoted as support of the prior statement but is discussed in its own right; the question is whether it is a parallel to the earlier statement or not.
¹¹⁹ Therefore it is Temple property and any non-sacramental use is larceny committed on Heaven’s property.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:6)

כְּלֵי שָׁרֵת מֵאֵימָתַי הֵן קְדֵישִׁין. מִיַּד אוֹ בִשְׁעַת הַתַּשְׁמִישׁ. אִין תֵּימַר. מִיַּד. נִיחָא. אִין תֵּימַר. בִּשְׁעַת הַתַּשְׁמִישׁ. כְּאַחַת הֵן קְדוֹשִׁין. נִיחָא שֶׁלְמֹשֶׁה שֶׁנִּתְקַדְּשׁוּ בְשֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה. בְּרַם שֶׁלִּשְׁלֹמֹה כְּאַחַת הֵן קְדֵישִׁין וּמִתְקַדְּשִׁין. בִּכְנִיסָתָן לָאָרֶץ הָיוּ מְפַנִּין מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁל מֹשֶׁה לְתוֹךְ שֶׁלִּשְׁלֹמֹה. לֹא הָיָה שָׁם שֶׁלְמֹשֶׁה כְּאַחַת הֵן קְדֵישִׁין וּמִתְקַדְּשִׁין. וּבָעֲלִיָיתָן מִן הַגּוֹלָה הָיוּ מְפַנִּין מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁלִּשְׁלֹמֹה לְתוֹךְ שֶׁלָּהֶם. לֹא הָיָה שָׁם שֶׁלִּשְׁלֹמֹה כְּאַחַת הֵן קְדֵישִׁין וּמִתְקַדְּשִׁין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
¹²⁰ 3:1 (**ל**). From which moment on are vessels of Temple service holy? Immediately¹²¹ or at the moment of use? If you are saying immediately, it is understandable. If you are saying at the moment of use, simultaneously they become holy {and make holy}¹²² necessary for understanding the sentence.. One can understand for those of Moses which became holy by the anointing oil¹²³. But those of Solomon simultaneously became holy and made holy. When they entered the Land they transferred from Moses’s to Solomon’s¹²⁴. If none of Moses was available, they simultaneously became holy and made holy. When they returned from the Diaspora, they transferred from Solomon’s¹²⁵ to theirs. If none of Solomon was available, they simultaneously became holy and made holy.

footnotes:
¹²⁰ The same text is in Megillah
¹²¹ Is a declaration of intent to use the vessel in the Temple the equivalent of a formal dedication and donation to the Temple, or not? Since the contents of a sacred vessel automatically become holy, in the second case the holiness of the vessel and its power to convert profane to sacral start at the same moment.
¹²² Added from Megillah,
¹²³ Before they were actually used. This is an action, not a declaration of intent.
¹²⁴ But first to the Tabernacle at Shiloh.
¹²⁵ The vessels given by Cyrus from the treasury of Babylon.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:7)

אֲבָנִים שֶׁחָצְבָן לְשֵׁם מֵת אֲסוּרִין בַּהֲנָיָיה. לְשֵׁם חַי וּלְשֵׁם מֵת מוּתָּרִין בַּהֲנָיָיה. הַזּוֹרֵק כְּלִי לִפְנֵי מִיטָּתוֹ שֶׁל מֶת לְתוֹךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת אָסוּר בַּהֲנָיָיה. כָּל חוּץ לְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת מוּתָּר בַּהֲנָיָיה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Stones quarried for a corpse are forbidden for usufruct¹²⁶. For a corpse or a living person¹²⁷ 48a: A mausoleum built for a person still living is permitted for usufruct. they are permitted for usufruct. If somebody throws an implement near the bier of a corpse, within four cubits it is forbidden for usufruct; anything outside four cubits is permitted for usufruct

footnotes:
¹²⁶ Since a grave and its appurtenances are forbidden for usufruct.
¹²⁷ Babli Sanhedrin


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:8
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:8)

נִמְצֵאתָ אוֹמֵר. חָמֵשׁ טְבִילוֹת וַעֲשָׂרָה קִידּוּשִׁין טוֹבֵל וּמְקַדֵּשׁ בּוֹ ביּוֹם. מְנָיִין שֶׁשְּׁנֵי קִידּוּשֵׁי יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם עַל כָּל טְבִילָה וּטְבִילָה. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וּפָשַׁט וְרָחַץ וְרָחַץ (וּפָשַׁט) [וְלָבַשׁ.] אָמַר רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. וְדִין הוּא. מַה אִם בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ טָעוּן טְבִילָה טָעוּן קִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם. כָּאן שֶׁהוּא טָעוּן טְבִילָה לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן יְהֵא טָעוּן קִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם. טוּל לָךְ מַה שֶׁהֶבֵאתָה. אִי מַה לְהַלָּן אַחַת כָּל הַיּוֹם אַף כָּאן אַחַת כָּל הַיּוֹם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וּפָשַׁט אֶת בִּגְדֵי הַבָּד. שֶׁאֵין תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר אֲשֶׁר לָבַשׁ. וְכִי עָלָת עַל דַּעְתֵּינוּ כְּלוּם הוּא פּוֹשֵׁט אֶלָּא מַה שֶׁהוּא לוֹבֵשׁ. אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר אֲשֶׁר לָבַשׁ. הִקִּישׁ פְּשִׁיטָה לִלְבִישָׁה. מַה לְבִישָׁה בְקִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם אַף פְּשִׁיטָה בְּקִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. לֹא מִסְתַּבְּרָא (דְלָא) [אֶלָּא] חִילּוּפִּין. הִקִּישׁ לְבִישָׁה לִפְשִׁיטָה. מַה פְּשִׁיטָה בְּקִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם אַף לְבִישָׁה בְּקִידּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
¹²⁸ in *Sifra Aḥare Pereq* 6(6).”You find that by five immersions and ten sanctifications he immerses and sanctifies himself on that day. From where that there are two sanctifications for every immersion? The verse says⁹⁷ 16:23–24, where at the end of the expiatory service Aaron is commanded first to take off his byssus garments, then to wash (immerse himself), and then to dress in the High Priest’s garb for the ordinary afternoon service., *and he undressed, and he washed, and he washed, (and he undressed) [and he dressed].* Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon said, it is an argument *de minore ad majus.* Since at a place where he does not need immersion he needs sanctification of hands and legs¹²⁹, here where he needs immersion not so much more that he should need sanctification of hands and legs? Take away your argument. Since there it is once for the entire day, also here it would be once for the entire day¹³⁰. The verse says, *and he shall take off the linen garments,* why does the verse say, *which he wore?* Could we ever think that he took off what he was not wearing? Then why does it say, *which he wore?* It bracketed undressing and dressing. Since dressing needs sanctification of hands and legs, also undressing needs sanctification of hands and legs⁹⁸ 6(6) and here in Halakhah 7:3, Babli 71a. It says in *Lev.* 16:23, *he shall take off the linen garments which he wore.* Since nobody can take off clothing which he does not wear, the reference is taken to v. 4 where Aaron is commanded *to wash his flesh in water and wear them.* Therefore all procedures connected with dressing are required for undressing, in the same order..” Rebbi Mana said, it is reasonable the opposite way. It bracketed undressing and dressing. Since undressing needs sanctification of hands and legs, also dressing needs sanctification of hands and legs¹³¹.”

footnotes:
¹²⁸ One returns to the discussion of the Mishnah. Most of this paragraph is a baraita
⁹⁷ The argument is about Lev.
¹²⁹ During all other days of the year, there is only one sanctification at the start of the day’s service.
¹³⁰ Since the consequence of a logical argument cannot be stronger than the premise.
⁹⁸ The argument is more explicit in Sifra Aḥare Pereq
¹³¹ Since “washing” is mentioned after undressing and before dressing. Only the corrector’s text is correct.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:9
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:9)

וְאֵין שֵׁינִי שֶׁל פִּילוּסִין יָפֶה מִן הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁלְהִנְדְּוְין. מִשֵׁם מִילָּה דְשָׁמְעָה פַרוטֵי. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹן אֵין לְמַעְלָה מִמֶּנּוּ. [הַשֵּׁנִי שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹן וְהָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבַּשֵּׁנִי שָׁוִין.] וְאֵין שֵׁינִי שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹן יָפֶה מִן הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבַּשֵּׁינִי. מִשֵׁם מִילָּה דְשָׁמְעָה פַרוטֵי. מַאי כְדוֹן. רִבִּי נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי מָנָא. בְּשַׁחַר כְּתוּב בַּד בַּד אַרְבָּעָה פְעָמִים. וּבְמִנְחָה כָתוּב בַּד.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
But is not second quality of Pelusian better than first Indian¹³⁴? A formulation which is an exaggeration¹³⁵. There, we have stated¹³⁶8:5, about the oil qualified for the lamp and the flour sacrifices in the Temple. Since the Mishnah is known, the corrector’s addition is not absolutely necessary.: “Nothing is better than the best of first quality. [Second tier of the first and first tier of the second are equal.]” But is not the second tier of first quality better than the first of second quality? A formulation which is an exaggeration. What about it? Rebbi Nahman in the name of Rebbi Mana: In the morning, *linen* is written four times. In the afternoon, *linen* is written¹³⁷ 16:23 linen is mentioned only once, in contrast to 4 times in v. 4..

footnotes:
¹³⁴ Then why does the Mishnah not require second quality Pelusian linen for the afternoon service?
¹³⁵ Arabic فرط “excess, exaggeration”. The Mishnah is formulated to give leeway in the choice of materials.
¹³⁶ Mishnah Menaḥot
¹³⁷ In Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:10
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:6:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:6:10)

מַעֲשֶׂה בֵירִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן פִיאַבִּי שֶׁלָּבַשׁ כֻּתָּנוֹת בְּמֵאָה מְנָה וְעָלָה וְהִקְרִיב עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. מַעֲשֶׂה בְרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן חַרְסוֹם שֶׁלָּבַשׁ כּוּתָּנוֹת בִּשְׁתֵּי רִיבּוֹא וְעָלָה וְהִקְרִיב עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. וְהוֹרִידוּ אוֹתוֹ אֶחָיו הַֹכֹּהֲנִים שֶׁהָיָה נִרָאֶה מִתּוֹכָהּ עָרוּם. מֶה עָשָׂה. מִילֵּא אוֹתָהּ מַיִם וְסָבַב אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
It happened that Rebbi Ismael ben Phiabi wore coats worth 100 *mina,* he went up and sacrificed on the altar¹³⁸. It happened that Rebbi Eleazar ben Hartom wore coats worth 20’000¹³⁹ 200 *mina.*, he went up and sacrificed on the altar, but his brothers the Cohanim took him down since he was seen naked under it. What did he do? He drenched it with water and circled the altar seven times¹⁴⁰.

footnotes:
¹³⁸ First he cannot serve without first donating his garments to the Temple and second they will become unusable by the bloodstains that are unavoidable.
¹³⁹ 20’000 denar =
¹⁴⁰ He made his garment opaque by soaking it with water and then drying it by circling the flames on the altar.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:1)

**משנה:** בָּא לוֹ אֵצֶל פָּרוֹ וּפָרוֹ הָיָה עוֹמֵד בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ רֹאשׁוֹ לַדָּרוֹם וּפָנָיו לַמַּעֲרָב הַכֹּהֵן עוֹמֵד בַּמִּזְרָח וּפָנָיו לַמַּעֲרָב. סָמַךְ שְׁתֵּי יָדָיו עָלָיו וְנִתְוַדֶּה וְכָךְ הָיָה אוֹמֵר אָנָּא הַשֵּׁם עָוִיתִי פָּשַׁעְתִּי חָטָאתִי לְפָנֶיךָ אֲנִי וּבֵיתִי. אָנָּא הַשֵּׁם כַּפֶּר נָא לָעֲוֹנוֹת וְלַפְּשָׁעִים וְלַחֲטָאִים שֶׁעָוִיתִי וְשֶׁפָּשַׁעְתִּי וְשֶׁחָטָאתִי לְפָנֶיךָ אֲנִי וּבֵיתִי כַּכָּתוּב בְּתוֹרַת משֶׁה עַבְדֶּךָ כִּי בַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם וגו׳: וְהֵן עוֹנִין אַחֲרָיו בָּרוּךְ שֵׁם כְּבוֹד מַלְכוּתוֹ לְעוֹלָם וָעֶד:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** He comes to his bull¹⁴¹ 16:3, 6.; his bull was standing between the Temple Hall and the altar, its head to the South and its face to the West¹⁴², and the Cohen standing in the East with his face to the West. He leans his hands on it¹⁴³ and confesses, and thus he was saying: “Please Hashem¹⁴⁴, I acted criminally, I offended, I sinned¹⁴⁵ before You, I and my house. Please Hashem, please atone the criminal acts, and the offenses, and the sins, by which I offended, acted criminally, and sinned before You, I and my house, as is written in the Torah of Your servant Moses¹⁴⁶ 16:30., *because on that day He will atone for you,* etc.” They¹⁴⁷ answer him: “Praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever” He comes to the Eastern part of the courtyard, North of the altar¹⁴⁸; the executive officer¹⁴⁹ to his right and the head of the serving family¹⁵⁰ Each watch was divided into 6 families; each family serving for one day, except for the Sabbath when the entire watch were serving together. The head of the family serving on the day of Atonement accompanies the High Priest. to his left. There were two he-goats,¹⁵¹ 16:8. and an um¹⁵² was there with two lots in it. They were of boxwood but Ben Gamia¹⁵³ made them from gold; he was remembered for praise.

footnotes:
¹⁴¹ The bull to be sacrificed which he is required to provide from his own money; Lev.
¹⁴² The bull’s body was standing North to South but its head was bent to the West, facing the Temple Hall.
¹⁴³ Between its horns.
¹⁴⁴ “The Name”, the generally accepted sobriquet for the Divine Name, whose correct pronunciation was taught only to the High Priest and which he only used on the Day of Atonement in his confessions.
¹⁴⁵ As explained in the Halakhah, עָוֹן is a criminal act, פֶּשַׁע is an intentional sin, and חֵטְא is an unintentional sin.
¹⁴⁶ Lev.
¹⁴⁷ The priests and the people standing in the outer courtyards.
¹⁴⁸ The prescribed place of slaughter of all most holy sacrifices.
¹⁴⁹ The person overseeing the daily routine in the Temple.
¹⁵⁰ The Cohanim were divided into 24 watches; each watch came to the Temple for one week to serve there (except for a few permanent offices, enumerated in Tractate Šeqalim.)
¹⁵¹ Lev.
¹⁵² Greek κάλπη.
¹⁵³ The High Priest Joshua ben Gamia, contemporary of king Agrippa I, who instituted universal Jewish compulsory elementary education.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:2)

**הלכה:** אֵי זֶהוּ צְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁלְמִזְבֵּחַ שֶׁהוּא כָשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטַת קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים. מִקִּירוּ שֶׁלְמִזְבֵּחַ צְפוֹנִי וְעַד כּוֹתֶל הָעֲזָרָה צְפוֹנִי עַד כְּנֶגֶד כָּל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. יֵשְׁנָן כִּשְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁתַּיִם אַמָּה. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי. רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. מִכְּנֶגֶד בֵּית הַחִילְפוֹת עַד כְּנֶגֶד בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְעַד כּוֹתֶל הָעֲזָרָה הַמִּזְרַחִי. רִבִּי מוֹסִיף. מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת רַגְלֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמַּה. מְקוֹם דְּרִיסַת רַגְלֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה אַמַּה. מִקִּירוּ שֶׁלְמִזְבֵּחַ הַצְּפוֹנִי וְעַד כּוֹתֶל הָעֲזָרָה הַמִּזְרַחִי.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** What is “North of the altar” which is qualified for the slaughter of most holy sacrifices¹⁵⁴ 1:11 ; for all other most holy sacrifices it is prescribed that they be slaughtered “at the place of the elevation sacrifice.”.? From the Northern wall of the altar to the Northern wall of the courtyard the entire width of the altar, i. e., 32 cubits¹⁵⁵ 3:1., the words of Rebbi¹⁵⁶ 20a), “R. Yose ben R. Jehudah”. This reading is required here also since Rebbi is quoted later to extend the permitted area another 22 cubits Eastward.. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon says, from before the House of Knives¹⁵⁷ up to¹⁵⁸ instruct that all kinds of most holy sacrifices must be slaughtered “before the Eternal”, i. e., to the East of the Temple Hall. between the Hall and the altar, to the Eastern¹⁵⁹ wall of the courtyard. Rebbi adds: the place where Cohanim can enter, eleven cubits, and the place where Israel can enter, eleven cubits¹⁶⁰ 2:6). Rebbi adds that part of the area of all courtyards which is North of the altar., from the Northern rim of the altar to the Eastern wall of the courtyard.

footnotes:
¹⁵⁴ For the elevation sacrifice this is required in Lev.
¹⁵⁵ The length of each side of the square altar, Mishnah Middot
¹⁵⁶ In the Babli 36a (Zevaḥim
¹⁵⁷ On the Northern wall between the Temple Hall and the altar there were 24 niches, one for each watch of priests, where they kept their slaughtering knives.
¹⁵⁸ The word עַד “up to” has to be deleted, since the place of the niches was there. Many verses in Lev.
¹⁵⁹ “Eastern” must be deleted and replaced by “Northern”. The Eastern wall is at the entrance of the courtyard.
¹⁶⁰ The area of the altar and westward could only be entered by Cohanim at the time of service; East of it was the courtyard of the Cohanim, 11 cubits wide, where Cohanim could enter at all times, even if not currently occupied. East of this was a space, also 11 wide, accessible to Israel males. Still further East was the women’s courtyard, 135 cubits wide (Middot


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:3)

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לֹא מַצָאנוּ שְׁחִיטָה כְשֵׁירָה בְזָר. רַב מְפַקֵּד לְתַלְמִידוֹי. בְּכָל אֲתַר הֲווֹן תַנֵּיי. שׁוֹחֵט. חוּץ מִפָּרָה הֲווֹן תַנֵּיי. זוֹרֵק. וְאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לֹא מַצָאנוּ שְׁחִיטָה (כְשֵׁירָה) [פְסוּלָה] בְזָר. הָתִיב רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא. וְהָא כְתִיב וְשָׁחַט וְהִזָּה. מָה הַזָּיָיה לֹא הוּכְשְׁרָה בְאִשָּׁה כְאִישׁ אַף שְׁחִיטָה לֹא הוּכְשְׁרָה בְאִשָּׁה כְאִישׁ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. הֲרֵי הַזָּיָיה מִיָימֶיהָ הֲרֵי הִיא כְשֵׁירָה בְזָר וּפְסוּלָה בְאִשָּׁה. אָמַר לֵיהּ. תַּמָּן לֵית כְּתִיב כֹּהֵן. וְלֵיידָא מִילְּתָא כְתִיב אִישׁ. לְהַכְשִׁיר אֶת הַזָּר. הִיא אִישׁ הִיא אִשָּׁה. בְּרַם הָכָא כְּתִיב כֹּהֵן. הִיא זָר הִיא אִשָּׁה. אִין תֵּימַר שֶׁהִיא כְשֵׁירָה בְזָר תּוּכְשַׁר בְּאִשָּׁה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Joḥanan said, we do not find that slaughter be qualified¹⁶¹ 3:1 states without dissent that slaughter of sacrifices by a Non-Cohen, a woman, or a slave, is qualified. by a non-Cohen. Rav commanded his students, everywhere state “he slaughters”, but for the Cow¹⁶² 19). Here one has to switch the places of “slaughters” and sprinkles.” Rav instructed that in *baraitot* specifying where a Cohen is indispensable, it always should mention sprinkling (mostly pouring the blood on the altar) but not slaughtering. But he requires that the Cow be slaughtered by a Cohen even though *Num.* 19:3 states only that somebody has to slaughter the Cow in the Cohen’s presence. state “sprinkles”; and Rebbi Joḥanan said, we do not find that slaughter be (qualified) [disqualified]¹⁶³ by a non-Cohen. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba objected. Is it not written, *he slaughters, he sprinkles*¹⁶⁴ 19:3, 4. This sprinkling is not that of water with the ashes of the Red Cow, but of its blood, and the verse specifies that it has to be done by the Cohen.*?* Since sprinkling is not qualified by a woman as by a man¹⁶⁵ 19:18 is that it describes a rite which does not require a Cohen., also slaughter is not qualified by a woman as by a man. He said to him, but sprinkling always was qualified by a Non-Cohen and disqualified by a woman¹⁶⁶. He answered him, there “Cohen” is not written¹⁶⁷ 16:15. While in the case of the bull, Aaron is only commanded *to sacrifice*(v. 6), in the case of the he-goat it is spelled out that he has to slaughter. There is more reason to require the High Priest to personally slaughter the he-goat than the bull.. For which purpose is written *a man?* To qualify a non-Cohen. There is no difference between man and woman. If you are saying that it is qualified by a non-Cohen, it has to be qualified by a woman.

footnotes:
¹⁶¹ This must read “disqualified” since Mishnah Zevaḥim
¹⁶² The Red Cow (Num.
¹⁶³ The text in parentheses is the scribe’s, consistent with his earlier text, but materially wrong. The text in brackets is the corrector’s; its correctness is shown by the following argument of R. Ḥiyya bar Abba.
¹⁶⁴ Num.
¹⁶⁵ The main thrust of Num.
¹⁶⁶ If slaughter of sacrifices is permitted to laymen, why is the High Priest burdened with slaughter in addition to all his other duties on that day?
¹⁶⁷ Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:4)

רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֵּן יוֹחַי. פַּר שֶׁלְיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים צָרִיךְ כֹּהֵן. וְלָמָּה לֹא אָמַר וְשָׂעִיר. דּוּ קְרָיָיא וְשָׁחַט וְהֵבִיא. מַה הֲבָאָה בְכֹהֵן אַף שְׁחִיטָה בְכֹהֵן. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא רִבִּי יָסָא רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֵּן יוֹחַי. פַּר וְשָׂעִיר שֶׁלְיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים צְרִיכִין כֹּהֵן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Iohai. The bull of the Day of Atonement requires a Cohen.¹⁶⁶ But why does he not say, “and the he-goat”? That is the verse, *and he slaughters, and he brings*¹⁶⁷ 16:15. While in the case of the bull, Aaron is only commanded *to sacrifice*(v. 6), in the case of the he-goat it is spelled out that he has to slaughter. There is more reason to require the High Priest to personally slaughter the he-goat than the bull.*.* Since bringing is by a Cohen, also the slaughter is by a Cohen. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Yasa, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Iohai. The bull and the he-goat of the Day of Atonement require a Cohen.

footnotes:
¹⁶⁶ If slaughter of sacrifices is permitted to laymen, why is the High Priest burdened with slaughter in addition to all his other duties on that day?
¹⁶⁷ Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:5)

אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּיי. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הוּא אוֹמֵר. אָנָּא הָשֵּׁם. וּבַשְּׁנִיָיה הוּא אוֹמֵר. אָנָּא בַשֵּׁם.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Ḥaggai said, the first time he says “please Hashem”, the second time he says, “please Bashem”¹⁶⁸ 16:30), but fixes the text for the re-enactment of the ritual in the *musaph* prayer of the Day of Atonement.

footnotes:
¹⁶⁸ The correct version of the Mishnah is that in the confession the reading is Hashem, but in the prayer for forgiveness it is Bashem. Obviously this does not refer to what the High Priest actually said, since he used the correct vocalization for YHWH on all three occasions in the ritual (in the confession, in the prayer for forgiveness, and in the quote from Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:6)

[תַּנֵּי. כֵּיצַד מִתְוַודֶּה. עָוִיתִי פָּשַׁעְתִּי חָטָאתִי. וְאוֹמֵר נוֹשֵׂא עָוֹן וָפֶשַׁע וְחַטָּאָה.] וְאוֹמֵר וְהִתְוַדָּה עָלָיו אֶת כָּל עֲוֹנוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. וְחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים. עֲוֹנוֹת אֵילּוּ הַזְּדוֹנוֹת. פִּשְׁעֵיהֶם אֵילּוּ הַמְּרָדִים. חַטֹּאתָם אֵילּוּ הַשְּׁגָגוֹת. מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא מִתְוַדֶּה עַל הַזְּדוֹנוֹת וְעַל הַמְּרָדִים הוּא חוֹזֵר וּמִתְוַדֶּה עַל הַשְּׁגָגוֹת. אֶלָּא כָךְ הָיָה מִתְוַדֶּה. אָנָּא הַשֵּׁם. חָטָאתִי עָוִיתִי פָּשַׁעְתִּי לְפָנֶיךָ אֲנִי וּבֵיתִי (כול׳) [וּבְנֵי אַהֲרֹן. כַּכָּתוּב בְּתוֹרַת משֶׁה עַבְדֶּךָ לֵאמֹר כִּי בַיּוֹם הַזֶּה וגו׳. וְהֵן עוֹנִין אַחֲרָיו. בָּרוּךְ שֵׁם כְּבוֹד מַלְכוּתוֹ לְעוֹלָם וָעֶד.] וְכֵן מָצִינוּ דֶּרֶךְ כָּל הַמִּתְוַדִּים מִתְוַדִּים. דָּוִד אָמַר חָטָאנוּ עִם אֲבוֹתֵינוּ הֶעֱוִינוּ וְהִרְשָׁעְנוּ. שְׁלֹמֹה בְנוֹ אָמַר [חָטָאנוּ] הֶעֱוִינוּ רָשָׁעְנוּ. דָּנִיאֵל אָמַר חָטָאנוּ עָוִינוּ הִרְשַׁעְנוּ וּמָרָדְנוּ. אַף הוּא כָךְ הָיָה מִתְוַדֶּה. חָטָאתִי עָוִיתִי פָּשַׁעְתִּי לְפָנֶיךָ. מָהוּ שֶׁמֹּשֶׁה אָמַר. נוֹשֵׂא עָוֹן וָפֶשַׁע וְחַטָּאָה. וְאוֹמֵר וְהִתְוַדָּה עָלָיו אֶת כָּל עֲוֹנוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וגו׳. אֶלָּא מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא מִתְוַדֶּה עַל הַזְּדוֹנוֹת וְעַל הַמְרָדִים כְּאִילּוּ הֵן שְׁגָגוֹת לְפָנָיו.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
¹⁶⁹2(4–6), the entire paragraph. The starting sentence was added by the corrector, probably from one of the parallel sources.[It was stated: “How does he confess? “I acted criminally, I rebelled, I sinned;’ and it says¹⁷⁰ 34:7., *He forgives crime, rebellion, and sin;* and it says¹⁷¹ 16:21., *and he shall confess over it all crimes of the Children of Israel,* etc., the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, criminal acts are intentional crimes, offenses are rebellions¹⁷², sins are inadvertent actions¹⁷³ 1:3 (Note 114), Babli *Ševuot*12b, *Keritut* 25b.. After he confesses about criminal acts he turns around and confesses about inadvertent acts? But he confesses as follows: Please Hashem, I sinned, I acted criminally, I rebelled before You, I and my house (etc..) [and the sons of Aaron. As is written in the Torah of Moses as follows, *for on that day he shall,* etc. They, answer him: “Praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever”.]¹⁷⁴ And so we find that confessors do confess. David said¹⁷⁵ 106:6. The *vaw* added to the last word is from the synagogue service of the Day., *we and our fathers sinned, we acted criminally and we led to bad behavior.* His son Solomon said¹⁷⁶ 8:47., *[we sinned,] we acted criminally, behaved badly.* Daniel said¹⁷⁷9:5., *we sinned, we acted**criminally, we led to bad behavior, and we rebelled.* Also he was confessing thus: I sinned, I acted criminally, I rebelled before You. What means this which Moses said, *He forgives crime, rebellion, and sin;* and it says, *and he shall confess over it all crimes of the Children of Israel,* etc.¹⁷⁸? But since he confesses to criminal rebellious acts, it is as if they were inadvertent sins before Him.”

footnotes:
¹⁶⁹ Babli 36b, Sifra Aḥare Parashah
¹⁷⁰ Ex.
¹⁷¹ Lev.
¹⁷² Sins intentionally committed as rebellion against God.
¹⁷³ Ševuot
¹⁷⁴ The text in parentheses is the scribe’s, the one in brackets the corrector’s, probably added from one of the parallel sources.
¹⁷⁵ Ps.
¹⁷⁶ IK.
¹⁷⁷ Dan.
¹⁷⁸ How can one explain the illogical order?


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:7)

עֲשָׂרָה פְעָמִים הָיָה כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל מַזְכִּיר אֶת הַשֵּׁם בְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים. שִׁשָּׁה בְפָר וּשְׁלֹשָׁה בְשָׂעִיר וְאֶחָד בְּגוֹרָלוֹת. הַקְּרוֹבִים הָיוּ נוֹפְלִין עַל פְּנֵיהֵן. הָרְחוֹקִים הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים. בָּרוּךְ שֵׁם כְּבוֹד מַלְכוּתוֹ לְעוֹלָם וָעֶד. אֵילּוּ וְאֵילּוּ לֹא הָיוּ זָזִים מִשָּׁם עַד שֶׁהוּא מִתְעַלֵּם מֵהֵן. זֶה שְּׁמִי לְעֹלָם. זֶה שְּׁמִי לְעַלֵּם. בָּרִאשׁוֹנְה הָיָה אוֹמְרוֹ בְקוֹל גָּבוֹהּ. מִשָּׁרָבוּ הַפְּרוּצִין הָיָה אוֹמְרוֹ בְקוֹל נָמוּךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. עוֹמֵד הָיִיתִי בֵּין אַחַיי [הַכֹּהֲנִים] בְּשׁוּרָה וְהִטִּיתִי אָזְנִי כְלַפֵּי כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וּשְׁמַעְתִּיו מַבְלִיעוֹ בִנִעִימַת הַכֹּהֲנִים. בָּרִאשׁוֹנְה הָיָה נִמְסַר לְכָל אָדָם. מִשָּׁרָבוּ הַפְּרוּצִים לֹא הָיָה נִמְסַר אֶלָּא לַכְּשֵׂירִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Ten times did the High Priest pronounce the Name on the Day of Atonement¹⁷⁹: Six times with the bull¹⁸⁰, and three with the he-goat, and once with the lots¹⁸¹. Those near were falling on their faces, those farther away were saying “Praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever”. These and those did not move away from there before they forgot it. *This is My Name forever*¹⁸² 3:14.*,* “this is My Name to conceal.¹⁸³ 50a.” In earlier times he was saying it aloud. Since the lawless increased, he said it softly. Rebbi Tarphon said, I was standing in a row with my brothers the Cohanim and turned my ear towards the High Priest, when I heard him mixing it with the song of the Cohanim¹⁸⁴. In earlier times it was given to everybody. Since the lawless increased, it was given only to qualified ones.

footnotes:
¹⁷⁹ Babli 39b.
¹⁸⁰ 3 times with the bull confessing his sins the first time; 3 times with the bull confessing the sins of the Cohanim.
¹⁸¹ Mishnah 4:1.
¹⁸² Ex.
¹⁸³ Babli Pesaḥim
¹⁸⁴ They sang “Praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever” not after he had pronounced the name but immediately when he started pronouncing it.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:8
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:7:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:7:8)

שְׁמוּאֵל הֲוָה עֲבַר. שְׁמַע פַּרְסָיָיא מְקַלֵּל לִבְרֵיהּ בֵּיהּ וָמִית. אֲמַר. אֲזַל גַּבְרְא וּמָאן דִּשְׁמַע שְׁמַע. רִבִּי אִינְיָינִי בַּר סוֹסַיי סְלַק גַּבֵּי רִבִּי חֲנִינָה לְצִיפּוֹרִין. אֲמַר. אִיתָא וַאֲנָא מְסַר יָתֵיהּ לָךְ. עֲאַל לֵיהּ בְּרֵיהּ תְּחוֹתִי עַרְסָא. עֲטַשׁ וּשְׁמַע קָלֵיהּ. אֲמַר. מָה אַתּוֹן נְהִיגִין גַּבֵּיכוֹן בִּדְמִיוּ. אֲזֵל. לָא לָךְ וְלָא לֵיהּ. חַד אַסִּי בְצִיפּוֹרִין אֲמַר לְרִבִּי פִינְחָס בַּר חָמָא. אִיתָא וַאֲנָא מְסַר לֵי לָךְ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. לֵית אֲנָא יְכִיל. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. לָמָּה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. דַּאֲנָא אֲכִל מַעֲשֵׂר. וּמָאן דִּרְגִיל לֵיהּ לָאֵ יְכִיל מֵיכוּל מִבַּר נַשׁ כְּלוּם.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
¹⁸⁵ (Q). The strict Aramaic used in the paragraph attests to its aggadic character, explaining why the knowledge of the correct pronunciation of the Name is lost. Samuel was passing by when he heard a Persian cursing his son by it¹⁸⁶; he died. He said, a man is gone and [he] who heard, heard. Rebbi Iniany bar Sosay went up to Rebbi Ḥanina in Sepphoris. He said, come and I shall transmit it to you. His son went under the couch. He¹⁸⁷ sneezed and he¹⁸⁸ heard the sound. He said, why are you acting together in trickery¹⁸⁹, go! Neither for you nor for him. A physician¹⁹⁰ in Sepphoris said to Rebbi Phineas bar Ḥama, come and I shall transmit it to you. He told him, I am unable. He asked him, why? He said to him, because I am eating tithe, and anybody conversant with it¹⁸⁶ cannot eat anything from any person.

footnotes:
¹⁸⁵ A copy of this paragraph is in Qonteros Aḥaron
¹⁸⁶ The Name.
¹⁸⁷ The son.
¹⁸⁸ R. Ḥanina.
¹⁸⁹ Translation of the text of Q.
¹⁹⁰ In Q: R. Yose of Sepphoris.
¹⁸⁶ The Name.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:1)

**משנה:** בָּא לוֹ לְמִזְרַח הָעֲזָרָה לִצְפוֹן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ הַסְּגָן בִּימִינוֹ וְרֹאשׁ בֵּית אָב מִשְּׂמֹאלוֹ. וְשָׁם שְׁנֵי שְׂעִירִים וְקַלְפֵּי הָיְתָה שָׁם וּבָהּ שְׁנֵי גוֹרָלוֹת. שֶׁל אֶשְׁכְּרוֹעַ הָיוּ וַעֲשָׂאָן בֶּן גַּמְלָא שֶׁל זָהָב וְהָיוּ מַזְכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ לְשֶׁבַח: בֶּן קָטִין עָשָׂה שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר דַּד לַכִּיּוֹר שֶׁלֹּא הָיוּ לוֹ אֶלָּא שְׁנָיִם. וְאַף הוּא עָשָׂה מוּכְנִי לַכִּיּוֹר שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיוּ מֵימָיו נִפְסָלִין בְּלִינָה. מוֹנְבַּז הַמֶּלֶךְ הָיָה עוֹשֶׂה כָּל יְדוֹת הַכֵּלִים שֶׁל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁל זָהָב. הִילְנִי אִמּוֹ עָשְׂתָה נִבְרֶשֶׁת שֶׁל זָהָב עַל פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל. וְאַף הִיא עָשְׂתָה טַבֻּלָא שֶׁל זָהָב שֶׁפָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה כְתוּבָה עָלֶיהָ. נִיקָנוֹר נַעֲשׂוּ נִסִּים לְדַלְתוֹתָיו וְהָיוּ מַזְכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ לְשֶׁבַח:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** Ben Qatin made twelve spouts to the basin¹⁹¹, which had only two. He also made a mechanical device for the basin that its water should not become disqualified overnight¹⁹² of water which is enough to purify and therefore never becomes disqualified. Otherwise the sunrise of a new day disqualifies all remainders of the service of the previous day.. King Monobaz¹⁹³ made all handles of the vessels for the Day of Atonement of gold. His mother Helene made a golden chandelier at the door of the Temple. She also made a golden table with the Chapter about the deviant wife written on it. Miracles happened to Nicanor’s doors; one remembers him for praise.

footnotes:
¹⁹¹ From which the Cohanim sanctify hands and legs.
¹⁹² That the basin is lowered into a cistern containing 40 seˋah
¹⁹³ King of Adiabene in NE Mesopotamia, who converted to Judaism together with his mother.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:2)

**הלכה:** אֵי זֶהוּ צְפוֹנוֹ שֶׁלְמִזְבֵּחַ שֶׁהוּא כָשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטַת קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים. מִקִּירוּ שֶׁלְמִזְבֵּחַ צְפוֹנִי. גָּרַשׂ בְּהִילְכְתָא עִילִּיתָא עַד מִקִּירוּ שֶׁלְמִזְבֵּחַ הַצְּפוֹנִי וְעַד כּוֹתֶל הָעֲזָרָה הַמִּזְרַחִי.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** ¹⁹⁴ What is “North of the altar” which is qualified for the slaughter of most holy sacrifices¹⁵⁴ 1:11 ; for all other most holy sacrifices it is prescribed that they be slaughtered “at the place of the elevation sacrifice.”.? From the Northern wall of the altar; one repeats this from the preceding Halakhah up to “from the Northern rim of the altar to the Eastern wall of the courtyard.”

footnotes:
¹⁹⁴ Discussion of the second part of Mishnah 7 (Mishnah 9 in most Mishnah mss.)
¹⁵⁴ For the elevation sacrifice this is required in Lev.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:3)

חֲמִשָּׁה דְבָרִים הָיָה הַסְּגָן מְשַׁמֵּשׁ. הַסְּגָן אוֹמֵר לוֹ. אִישִׁי כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל הַגְבֵּהַּ יְמִינְךָ. סְגָן מִיְּמִינוֹ וְרֹאשׁ בֵּית אָב מִשְּׂמֹאלוֹ. הֵנִיף הַסְּגָן בַּסּוּדָרִין. אָחַז הַסְּגָן בִּימִינוֹ וְהֶעֱלָהוּ. לֹא הָיָה כֹהֵן גְּדוֹל מִתְמַנֶּה לִהְיוֹת כֹּהֵן גְּדוֹל עַד שֶׁהוּא נַעֲשֶׂה סְגָן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
For five things did the executive officer serve. The executive officer says to him, Sir High Priest, lift your right hand¹⁹⁵. The executive officer¹⁴⁹ to his right and the head of the serving family¹⁵⁰ Each watch was divided into 6 families; each family serving for one day, except for the Sabbath when the entire watch were serving together. The head of the family serving on the day of Atonement accompanies the High Priest. to his left¹⁹⁶. The executive officer swings scarves¹⁹⁷ 7:3.. The executive officer grabs his hand and brings him up¹⁹⁸ 7:3.. Nobody was appointed High Priest if he had not first been appointed executive officer.

footnotes:
¹⁹⁵ Mishnah 4:1.
¹⁴⁹ The person overseeing the daily routine in the Temple.
¹⁵⁰ The Cohanim were divided into 24 watches; each watch came to the Temple for one week to serve there (except for a few permanent offices, enumerated in Tractate Šeqalim.)
¹⁹⁶ Anywhere the High Priest goes on the Day of Atonement.
¹⁹⁷ Every day to signal to the Levites to start singing. Mishnah Tamid
¹⁹⁸ Everyday, if the High Priest wants to sacrifice, the executive officer has to help him after he climbed half of the ramp. Tamid


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:4)

וְקַלְפֵּי הָיָה שָׁם וּבָהּ שְׁנֵי גוֹרָלוֹת. וְשֶׁלְאֶשְׁכְּרוֹעַ הָיוּ. מָהוּ אֶשְׁכְּרוֹעַ. פֻּסְקִינוֹן. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל אֲחוֹי דְרַב בָּעֵי. אָבְדוּ. מָהוּ לָעֲשׂוֹת תַּחְתֵּיהֶן שֶׁלְזָהָב. יָיבֹא כְהָדָא. שֶׁמַּעֲלִין בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“And an urn¹⁵² was there with two lots in it. They were of boxwood. What is “of boxwood”? Πύξινον¹⁹⁹ 7:11 (Note 177), *Gen. r.*15(2).. Rebbi Samuel, Rav’s brother, asked: If they were lost, must the replacement be made from gold²⁰⁰? It shall come following “one increases in holiness but does not decrease²⁰¹ 6:6..”

footnotes:
¹⁵² Greek κάλπη.
¹⁹⁹ Cf. Ketubot
²⁰⁰ After ben Gamla made the lots of gold, may the replacement be made of boxwood as it was originally or must any future replacement be made of gold?No R. Samuel, Rav’s brother, is otherwise known in talmudic literature. One may conjecture that the name is a scribal error for R. Samuel, R. Berekhiah’s brother.
²⁰¹ Mishnah Šeqalim


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:5)

וְיַעֲשׂוּ דַדִּין זֶה עַל גַּבֵּי זֶה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה. כְּיוֹם מְרוּבֶּה שֵׁלְתָּמִיד. הָעֶלְיוֹן מִשֵּׁם כְּלי פָּחוּת בְּרוּבּוֹ. וְהַתַּחְתּוֹן אֵין בּוֹ מִשֵּׁם אֲוִירוֹ שֶׁלְכֶּלִי. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. אַמַּת הַמַּיִם הָיְתָה מוֹשֶׁכֶת לוֹ מֵעֵיטָם. וְהָיוּ רַגְלֵי שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם פְּחוּתִין כְּרִימּוֹנִים. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר כַּרְסָנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא. הַיָּם בֵּית טְבִילָה לַכֹּהֲנִים הוּא. וְהַיָּם לְרָחְצָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בּוֹ. וְלֹא כְלִי הוּא. אַמַּת הַמַּיִם מוֹשֶׁכֶת לוֹ מֵעֵיטָם וְהָיוּ רַגְלֵי שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם פְּחוּתִים כְּרִימּוֹנִים.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Could they make spouts one on top of the other²⁰²? Rebbi Jonah said, for the maximum day of the daily sacrifice²⁰³. The top because of a vessel reduced in its majority. But is the lower not in the category of volume inside a vessel²⁰⁴ water drawn in a container and poured into a cistern renders the latter disqualified. One has to prove that the basin does not qualify as a container. According to the Babli, the original two spouts were one on top of the other (37a).
As was noted in *Eruvin* (Chapter 1, Notes 199–206) the Solomon’s basin was a cylinder put on top of a rectangular solid. The upper part, being totally open to the bottom, is not a container. But the bottom seems to be a container.? Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, a water canal was drawing from Etam²⁰⁵ “the pools of Salomon”, source of the water for the Temple., and the feet to the South were reduced in the size of pomegranates²⁰⁶ 7:25). A hole in the size of a pomegranate makes any vessel pure since it cannot be a container even for solid food (Mishnah *Kelim* 17:1). (In Q, there is no mention of “Southern”.). Rebbi Simeon ben Carsana in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: The Sea was a place of immersion of the Cohanim, *and the Sea for the Cohanim to wash in it*²⁰⁷*.* But was it not a vessel? A water canal was drawing from Etam, and the feet to the South were reduced in the size of pomegranates.

footnotes:
²⁰² Here starts the discussion of Mishnah 10. It is understood that Ben Qatina made 12 spouts level around the basin. Why was he restricted to 12?
²⁰³ By Mishnah 2:5, this is the maximum number of Cohanim needed for any morning daily sacrifice. Babli 37a.
²⁰⁴ How could there be a biblical requirement that the Cohanim sanctify themselves with water drawn from a basin? It is one of the general principles of the rules of purity that water only purifies if either it is flowing (in any amount) or is collected in a cistern (of at least 40 seah);
²⁰⁵ En Etam,
²⁰⁶ The basin was not a container since the water in it was not at rest. It was filled from the water canal and the water flowed out of holes in the hooves of the three Southern bronze cattle on which the basin was resting (IK.
²⁰⁷ This entire paragraph is copied in Q.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:6)

כְּתִיב וְאֵלֶּה מִסְפָּרָם אֲגַרְטְלֵי זָהָב שְׁלשִׁים. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן אָמַר. מְקוֹם שָׁאוֹגְרִין בּוֹ דָמוֹ שֵׁלְטָלֶה. אֲגַרְטְלֵי כֶסֶף אָלֶף. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. מְקוֹם שָׁאוֹגְרִין דָמוֹ שֵׁלְפָּר. מַחֲלָפִים תִּשְׁעָה וְעֶשְׂרִים. אָמַר רִבִּי סִימוֹן. אֵילּוּ הַסַּכִּינִין. כַּיי דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. הוּא הָיָה נִקְרָא בֵּית הַחִילְפוֹת. שֶׁשָּׁם הָיוּ גּוֹנְזִין אֶת הַסַּכִּינִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
²⁰⁷ It is written²⁰⁸ 4:6. The topic is to find roots for the uncommon words אֲגַרְטְלֵ֨י, מַֽחֲלָפִי֭ם.: *And these are their numbers: gold basins*30, Rebbi Samuel bar Nahman said, places where the blood of the lamb was collected. *Silver basins 1’000,* Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, places where the blood of the bull was collected. *Knives 29,* Rebbi Simon said, these are the knives, as we have stated there²⁰⁹ 4:7., “it was called the place of knives since there they hid the knives.”

footnotes:
²⁰⁷ This entire paragraph is copied in Q.
²⁰⁸ 2Chr.
²⁰⁹ Mishnah Middot


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:7)

הִילְנִי אִמּוֹ עָשְׂתָה נִבְרֶשֶׁת שֶׁל זָהָב עַל פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל. תְּרֵין אֲמוֹרִין. חַד אָמַר. מְנַרְתָּא. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר. קוֹנְכִיתָא. תִּרְגֵּם עֲקִילַס. לָקָבֵל נֶבְרַשְׁתָּא לַמְפַּדָס.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“His mother Helene made a golden chandelier at the door of the Temple..” Two Amoraim. One said, a chandelier. But the other said, a basin²¹⁰. Aquila translated *before the chandelier,* λαμπάδος²¹¹ 5:5..

footnotes:
²¹⁰ This translation is traditional; it is pure speculation. More likely is “a lamp (?) in shell form,” Aramaic diminutive of Greek κόγχη, ἡ “mussel”.
²¹¹ Genitive of λαμπάς, -άδος, ἡ, “torch”. This is the translation of the Theodotion version of the LXX of Dan.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:8
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:8)

אַף הִיא עָשְׂתָה טַבֻּלָה שֶׁלְּזָהָב שֶׁפָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה כְתוּבָה עָלֶיהָ. שֶׁבַּשָּׁעָה שֶׁהָיְתָה הַחַמָּה זוֹרַחַת הָיוּ הַנִּיצוֹצוֹת מְנַתְּזִין מִמֶּנָּה וְהָיוּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁזָּרְחָה הַחַמָּה. וּמַה הָיָה כָתוּב עָלֶיהָ. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יַנַּאי. אֲלֶ״ף בֵּי״ת הָיָה כָתוּב עָלֶיהָ. וְהָא תַנֵּי. כִּכְתָב שֶׁכָּאן כֵּן כְּתָב שֶׁכָּאן. לֹא מְעוּבֶּה וְלֹא מֵידַק אֶלָּא בֵינוֹנִי. פָּתַר לָהּ. כְּאֲלֶ״ף שֶׁכָּאן [כֵּן] אֲלֶ״ף שֶׁכָּאן. כְּבֵי״ת שֶׁכָּאן כֵּן בֵי״ת שֶׁכָּאן. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. כָּל פָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה הָיָה כָתוּב עָלֶיהָ. שֶׁמִּמֶּנָּה הָיָה קוֹרֵא וּמְתַרְגֵּם כָּל דִּקְדּוּקֵי הָפָּרָשָׁה.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
²¹² 2:2 (Notes 91–97).“also she made a golden plate with the paragraph of the suspected wife written on it.” When the sun rose, sparks were reflected on it and one knew that the sun had risen. What was written on it? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Alef-Bet was written on it²¹³ II, pp. 88–95).. But did we not state: In the script there it was written here, not heavy, not thin, but average²¹⁴. Explain “the Alef there” by “from the Alef there”, “the Bet there” by ’’from the Bet there”²¹⁵. Rebbi Hoshaia stated: The entire paragraph of the suspected wife was written there, and from it he was reading and explaining all details of the paragraph²¹⁶.

footnotes:
²¹² This paragraph is from Sotah
²¹³ Single letters were written on the tablet, each letter being the first of its word. (Cf. P. Kahle, Masoreten des Westens,
²¹⁴ The suspected wife’s scroll had to be written in the way the letters were on the queen’s tablet, not ornamental nor in italics. The questioner thought that the entire tablet had to be copied as it was written; then an abbreviated version would be impossible.
²¹⁵ For each letter one copies the entire word. The first sentence of the scroll would read on the tablet as אם ל ש א א ו ל ש ט ת א ה מ ה ה ה which would be copied as אם לא שכב איש אתך ואם לא שטית טומאה תחת אישך הנקי ממי המרים המאררים האלה where every first letter was copied exactly from the tablet and the rest of the word added in the same style of script. Babli 37b.
²¹⁶ While writing, the Cohen explained the text homiletically to the suspected wife, so that she would understand the meaning of the ceremony.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:9
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:8:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:8:9)

נִיקָנוֹר נַעֲשׂוּ נִיסִּים לְדַלְתוֹתָיו. וּמַזְכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ לְשֶׁבַח. תַּנֵּי. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיוּ בָאִין בִּסְפִינָה וְעָמַד עֲלֵיהֶן סַעַר גָּדוֹל בַּיָּם. וְנָטְלוּ אֶחָד מֵהֶם וְהִטִּילוּהוּ בַיָּם. וּבִיקְשׁוּ לְהַטִּיל עוֹד שֵׁינִי וְעָמַד וְגִיפְפוֹ. אָמַר לָהֶן. אִם מַטִּילִין אַתֵּם אוֹתוֹ לַיָּם הִטִּילוּנִי עִמּוֹ. וְהָיָה בוֹכֶה וּמִתְאַבֵּל וּבָא עַד שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לִלְמֵינָהּ שֶׁל יָפוֹ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיַע לִלְמֵינָהּ שֶׁל יָפוֹ הִתְחִיל מְבַעְבֵּעַ מִתַּחַת הַסְּפִינָה. כַּיי דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. כָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁם נִשְׁתַּנּוּ לִהְיוֹת שֶׁלְזָהָב חוּץ מִשַּׁעֲרֵי נִיקָנוֹר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה בָהֶן נֵס. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנְּחוּשְׁתָּן מַצְהִיב. תַּנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר. נְחוּשְׁתָּן הָיָה (קָרִונְתִיוֹן) [מַצְהִיב וְיוֹתֵר] יָפֶה מִשֶּׁל זָהַב.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“Miracles happened to Nicanor’s doors; one remembers him for praise.” It was stated²¹⁷: “It happened that they were traveling in a ship²¹⁸ when they ran into a big storm. They took one of the doors and threw it into the sea. When they wanted to throw also the second one he stood up and embraced it. He told them, it you are throwing it into the sea, throw me with it. He was crying and mourning continuously until he arrived at the port²¹⁹ of Jaffa. When he arrived at the port of Jaffa it started bubbling under the ship. As we have stated there²²⁰ 2:3., ‘ All doors there were changed into golden ones except Nicanor’s doors since a miracle happened to them, but some say because their bronze had a golden shine.’ ” It was stated in the name of Rebbi Eliezer²²¹, “their bronze was (Corinthian)²²² [gold colored and more] beautiful than gold.”

footnotes:
²¹⁷ Babli 38a, Tosephta 2:4.
²¹⁸ The parallel sources add: “From Alexandria”.
²¹⁹ Greek λιμήν, -ένες, ὁ.
²²⁰ Mishnah Middot
²²¹ In the parallel sources: R. Eliezer ben Jacob.
²²² This is the correct scribe’s text. The corrector who did not understand the word changed it to the text in brackets. Corinthian brass was the most expensive kind, used for luxury goods; a copper alloy probably containing some precious metal. Greek Κορίνθιον “Corinthian”, adj., n..


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:1
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:9:1)

**משנה:** וְאֵילּוּ לִגְנַאי שֶׁל בֵּית גַּרְמוּ לֹא רָצוּ לְלַמֵּד עַל מַעֲשֵׂה לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים. שֶׁל בֵּית אַבְטִינָס לֹא רָצוּ לְלַמֵּד עַל מַעֲשֵׂה הַקְּטֹרֶת. הוּגְדָּס בֶּן לֵוִי הָיָה יוֹדֵעַ פֶּרֶק בַּשִּׁיר וְלֹא רָצָה לְלַמֵּד. בֶּן קַמְצָר לֹא רָצָה לְלַמֵּד עַל מַעֲשֵׂה הַכְּתָב. עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנִים נֶאֱמַר זֵכֶר צַדִּיק לִבְרָכָה. וְעַל אֵילּוּ נֶאֱמַר וְשֵׁם רְשָׁעִים יִרְקָב:

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**MISHNAH:** But the following are for shame: The family Garmu did not want to teach the preparation of the shew-bread. The family Eutinos did not want to teach about preparation of the incense. ²²³ Hugdas ben Levi knew a chapter about song and did not want to teach. Ben Qamsar did not want to teach writing technique. About the earlier ones it is said²²⁴ 10:3., *the remembrance of the just is for blessing,* and about those it is said, *but the name of evildoers shall rot.*

footnotes:
²²³ Only the first two cases are discussed in the Halakhah. According to the Babli, Hugdas knew how to amplify his voice and Ben Qamsar knew how to write multiple letters simultaneously.
²²⁴ Prov.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:2
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:9:2)

**הלכה:** וְאֵילּוּ לִגְנַיי. בֵּית גַּרְמוּ. בֵּית גַּרְמוּ הָיוּ בְקִיאִין בְּמַעֲשֶׁה לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים וּבְרִדִּיָיתוֹ וְלֹא רָצוּ לְלַמֵּד. שָׁלְחוּ וְהֵבִיאוּ אוּמָנִים מֵאַלֶכְּסַנְדְרִיָּאה. וְהָיוּ בְקִיאִים בְּמַעֲשֶׁה לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים. וּבְרִדִּיָיתוֹ לֹא הָיוּ בְקִיאִין. בֶּית גַּרְמוּ הָיוּ מַסִּיקִין מִבִּפְנִים וְרוֹדִין מִבַּחוּץ. וְלֹא הָיְתָה מְעַפֶּשֶׁת. וְאֵילּוּ הָיוּ מַסִּיקִין מִבִּפְנִים וְרוֹדִין מִבִּפְנִים. וְהָיְתָה מְעַפֶּשֶׁת. וְכֵיוָן שֶׁיָּדְעוּ חֲכָמִים בַּדָּבָר אָמְרוּ. כָּל מַה שֶׁבָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לִכְבוֹדוֹ בָּרָא. כֹּל פָּעַל יְי לַמַּעֲנֵהוּ. שָׁלְחוּ אַחֲרֵיהֵם וְלֹא רָצוּ לָבוֹא עַד שֶׁכָּפְלוּ לָהֶן שְׂכָרָן. שְׁנֵים עַשָׂר מְנָה הָיוּ נוֹטְלִין וְנָתְנוּ לָהֶן עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר. עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע הָיוּ נוֹטְלִין וְנָתְנוּ לָהֶן אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן. מִפְּנֵי מַה אֵין אַתֶּם רוֹצִין לְלַמֵּד. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן. מְסוֹרֶת הִיא בְיָדֵינוּ מֵאֲבוֹתֵינוּ שֶׁהַבַּיִת הַזֶּה עָתִיד לִיחָרֵב. שֶׁלֹּא יִלְמְדוּ אֲחֵרִים וְיִהְיוּ עוֹשִׂין כֵּן לִפְנֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁלָּהֶן. בִּדְבָרִים הַלָּלוּ מֻזְכִּירִין אוֹתָן לִשְׁבָח. שֶׁלֹּא יָצָא בְּיַד בְּנֵיהֶם פַּת נְקִיָיה מֵעוֹלָם. שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ אוֹמְרִים. מִמַּעֲשֶׂה לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים הֵן אוֹכְלִין.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
**HALAKHAH:** “The following are for shame: The family Garmu.” ²²⁵ 5:2 (**ש**), Babli 38a, *Cant. rabba* 3:8. The *Šeqalim* text of the Babli *editio princeps* belongs to the spelling tradition of the Tosephta.“The family Garmu were experts in preparing the shew-bread and its removal from the oven, but they did not want to teach. They sent and brought craftsmen from Alexandria who were experts in preparing the shew-bread but were not experts in its removal from the oven. The family Garmu were heating from within and removing from the outside, and it did not become moldy²²⁶. But those were heating from the outside and removing from the inside, and it became moldy. When the Sages realized the situation, they said, everything which the Holy One, praise to Him, created, he created to His glory; *all work of the Eternal is for Himself*²²⁷ 16:4.*.* They sent after them, but they refused to come until they doubled their wages. They used to take twelve *mina*²²⁸ declare this weekly wages, an exaggeration.*,* so they gave them twenty-four. Rebbi Jehudah says, they used to take 24, so they gave them 48. They asked them, why do you not want to teach? They answered them, there is a tradition among us from our forefathers that this Temple will be destroyed in the future. Others should not learn and prepare the same before their foreign worship²²⁹. In the following matter one mentions them for praise, that in the hands of their children white bread was never found, so people should not say, from the preparation of shew-bread they are eating.”

footnotes:
²²⁵ Tosephta 2:5, Šeqalim
²²⁶ It had to stay fresh for a full week. The shew-bread was baked on clay forms in the shape of a ship.
²²⁷ Prov.
²²⁸ As yearly wages. The Babli and Cant. rabba
²²⁹ Idolatry.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:3
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:9:3)

שֶׁלְבֵּית אַבְטִינָס הָיוּ בְקִיִּין בְמַעֲשֵׂה הַקְּטוֹרֶת וּבְמַעֲלֶה עָשָׁן וְלֹא רָצוּ לְלַמֵּד. שָׁלְחוּ וְהֵבִיאוּ אוּמָנִים מֵאַלֶכְּסַנְדְרִיָּאה. וְהָיוּ בְקִיִּין בְמַעֲשֵׂה הַקְּטוֹרֶת. וּבְמַעֲלֶה עָשָׁן לֹא הָיוּ בְקִיאִין. שֶׁלְבֵּית אַבְטִינָס הָיְתָה מִתַמֶּרֶת וְעוֹלָה וּפּוֹסָה וְיוֹרֶדֶת. וְשֶׁלְאֵילוּ הָיְתָה פוֹסָה מִיַּד. וְכֵיוָן שֶׁיָּדְעוּ חֲכָמִים בַּדָּבָר אָמְרוּ. כָּל מַה שֶׁבָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לִכְבוֹדוֹ בָּרָא. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כֹּל הַנִּקְרָא בִשְׁמִי וגו׳. שָׁלְחוּ אַחֲרֵיהֵן וְלֹא רָצוּ לָבוֹא כול׳ עַד לִפְנֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁלָּהֶן. בִּדְבָרִים הַלָּלוּ מֻזְכִּירִין אוֹתָן לִשְׁבָח. שֱׁלֹּא יָצָאת אִשָּׁה שֶׁלְאֶחָד מֵהֶן מְבושֶׂמֶת מֵעוֹלָם. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא כְשֶׁהָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן נוֹשֵׂא אִשָּׁה מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר הָיָה פוֹסֵק עִמָּהּ שֶׁלֹּא תִתְבַּשֵּׂם.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
²³⁰ 5:2, Babli 38a, *Cant. rabba* 3:8. The text here is slightly shortened.“The family Eutinos were experts in preparing the incense and the smoke-creating herb, but they did not want to teach. They sent and brought craftsmen from Alexandria who were experts in preparing the incense but were not experts in the smoke-creating herb. The family Eutinos’s was going straight up, and spread²³¹, and descended. But theirs was immediately spreading. When the Sages realized the situation, they said, everything which the Holy One, praise to Him, created, he created to His glory; as it is said²³².43:7., *all which is called by My Name,* etc. They sent after them, but they refused to come, etc.²³³, up to “before their foreign worship²²⁹.” In the following matter one mentions them for praise, that no woman of any of them ever went out perfumed. Not only that, but if one of them married a woman from outside, he contracted with her that she should not use perfume.

footnotes:
²³⁰ Tosephta 2:6–7, Šeqalim
²³¹ فشى “to expand, spread”.
²³² Is
²³³ Here the corresponding text from the preceding paragraph has to be inserted.
²²⁹ Idolatry.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:4
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:9:4)

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מָצָאתִי תִינּוֹק אֶחָד מִבֵּית אַבְטִינָס. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ. בְּנִי. מֵאֵי זוֹ מִשְׁפָּחָה אַתָּה. אָמַר לִי. מִמִּשְׂפַּחַת פְּלוֹנִית. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ. בְּנִי. אֲבוֹתֶיךְ לְפִי שֶׁנִּתְכַּוְונוּ לְרַבּוֹת כְּבוֹדָם וּלְמָעֵט כְּבוֹד שָׁמַיִם לְפִיכָךְ נִתְמָעֵט כְּבוֹדָם וּכְבוֹד שָׁמַיִם נִתְרַבָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבְה. שָׂח לִי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן (לגס) [לגה]. מְלַקֵּט הָיִיתִי עֲשָׂבִים אֲנִי וְתִינּוֹק אֶחָד שֶׁלְּבֵית אַבְטִינָס. וְרָאִיתִי אוֹתוֹ שֶׁבָּכָה וְרָאִיתִי אוֹתוֹ שֶׁשָּׂחַק. אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ. בְּנִי. לָמָּה בָכִיתָה. אָמַר לִי. עַל כְּבוֹד בֵּית אַבָּא שֶׁנִּתְמָעֵט. וְלָמָּה שָׂחַקְתָּה. אָמַר לִי. עַל הַכָּבוֹד הַמְתוּקָּן לַצַּדִּיקִים לְעָתִיד לְבוֹא. הֲרֵי מַעֲלֶה עָשְׁן לְנֶגְדִּי. נוֹמֵיתִי לוֹ. בְּנִי. הַרְאֵהוּ לִי. אָמַר לִי. מְסוֹרֶת בְּיָדִי מֵאֲבוֹתַיי שֶׁלֹּא לְהַרְאוֹתוֹ לְבִירְיָיה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. פָּגַע בִּי זָקֵן אֶחָד מִשֶּׁלְבֵּית אַבְטִינָס. אָמַר לִי. רִבִּי. לְשֶׁעָבַר הָיוּ בֵית אַבָּא צְנוּעִין וְהָיוּ מוֹסְרִין אֶת הַמְגִילָּה הַזֹּאת אֵילּוּ לָאֵילּוּ. וְעַכְשָׁיו שֶׁאֵינָן נֶאֱמָנִין הֵילָךְ אֶת הַמְגִילָּה והִיזָּהֵר בָּהּ. וּכְשֶׁבָּאתִי וְהִרְצֵיתִי אֶת הַדְּבָרִים לִפְנֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה זָלְגוּ דְמָעָיו וְאָמַר. מֵעַתָּה אֵין אָנוּ צְרִיכִין לְהַזְכִּירָן לִגְנַאי.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
Rebbi Yose said, I found a child of the family Eutinos. I said to him, my son, from which family are you? he told me, from family X. I said to him, my son, because your forefathers intended to increase their prestige and to decrease Heaven’s prestige, therefore their prestige was diminished and Heaven’s prestige increased. Rebbi Aqiba said, Simeon ben Lagos²³⁴ following the text in the other sources. told me, I was collecting herbs, I and a youth from the family Eutinos, when I saw him crying and laughing. I said to him, my son, why did you cry? He said to me, about the prestige of my family which is diminished. And why did you laugh? About the glory prepared for the Just in the future world; there is smoke-creating herb before me! I said to him, my son, show it to me. He answered me, I have a tradition from my ancestors not to show it to any creature.’ Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, I met an old man from the family Eutinos. He said to me, ‘Rabbi. In the past my family were humble, and transmitting this scroll²³⁵ one to the other. But now they are not trustworthy; here the scroll is yours and take care of it.’ When I came and repeated these words before Rebbi Aqiba, his tears flowed and he said, from now on we do not have to mention them for shame.”

footnotes:
²³⁴ This is the spelling of the scribe. The corrector changed this to Logah
²³⁵ Containing the identification of the smoke-creating herb.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:5
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:9:5)

וְכוּלְּהֹן מָצְאוּ מַתְלָא לְדִבְרֵיהֶן חוּץ מִבֶּן קַמְצָר. כַּיי דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
All found an excuse for their behavior except Ben Qamsar. Also following what we have stated there²³⁷ 5:1. The following Paragraph also is there (Leiden ms. **ש**, Babli editio princeps **שׁ**, Munich ms. of the Babli M.).

footnotes:
²³⁷ Mishnah Šeqalim


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:6
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:9:6)

אֵילּוּ הֵן הַמְמוּנִּין שֶׁהָיוּ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר. רִבִּי סִימוֹן וְרַבָּנִן. חַד אָמַר. כְּשֵׁירֵי כָּל דּוֹר וָדוֹר בָּא לִמְנוֹת. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר. מִי שֶׁהָיָה בְאוֹתוֹ הַדּוֹר מָנָה מַה שֶׁבְּדוֹרוֹ. מָאן דְּאָמַר. כְּשֵׁירֵי כָּל דּוֹר וָדוֹר בָּא לִמְנוֹת. עַל כּוּלָּם הוּא אוֹמֵר. זֵיכֶר צַדִּיק לִבְרָכָה. מָאן דְּאָמַר. מִי שֶׁהָיָה בְאוֹתוֹ הַדּוֹר מָנָה מַה שֶׁבְּדוֹרוֹ. עַל כּוּלָּם הוּא אוֹמֵר. וְשֵׁם רְשָׁעִים יִרְקָב. עַל מִי נֶאֱמַר זֵיכֶר צַדִּיק לִבְרָכָה. עַל בֶּן קָטִין וַחֲבֵירָיו.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
“These are the appointees who were in the Sanctuary.” Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, Rebbi Simon and the rabbis. One said, he comes to enumerate the qualified ones of every generation²³⁸. But the other said, he who was in a generation enumerated what was in his generation²³⁹. He who said, he comes to enumerate the qualified ones of every generation, about all of them he says²²⁴ 10:3., *the remembrance of the just is for blessing.* He who said, he who was in a generation enumerated what was in his generation, about all of them he says²²⁴ 10:3., *but the name of evildoers shall not.* About whom was it said, *the remembrance of the just is for blessing?* About Ben Qatin and his kind.

footnotes:
²³⁸ The list is no historical document.
²³⁹ The list is a historical document from early Mishnaic times; time not otherwise determined.
²²⁴ Prov.
²²⁴ Prov.


###### Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:7
[Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3:9:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Yoma/r/3:9:7)

וְעַל כּוּלָּן הָיָה בֶּן זוֹמְא אוֹמֵר. מִשֶּׁלָּךְ יִתְּנוּ לָךְ. וּבִשְׁמָךְ קוֹרִין אוֹתָךְ. וּבָשִׁבְחָךְ מוֹשִׁיבִין אוֹתָךְ. וְאֵין שִׁכְחָה לִפְנֵי הַמָּקוֹם. וְאֵין אָדָם נוֹגֵעַ בְּמוּכָן לָךְ.

**The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:**
About all of them, Ben Zoma says, from yours they will give you, and by your name they are calling you, and according to your praise they place you, and there is no forgetting before the Omnipresent, and nobody touches what is prepared for you²⁴⁰.

footnotes:
²⁴⁰ He teaches an extreme doctrine of predestination, that the result of every action a person takes is predetermined in Heaven. Then even the exaggerated claims of the artisans working for the Temple would be predestined.