## Yoma Daf 24b

###### Yoma 24b:1
[Yoma 24b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:1)

״וּלְמִבֵּית לַפָּרוֹכֶת וַעֲבַדְתֶּם״, ״אֶל מִבֵּית לַפָּרוֹכֶת״ הוּא דַּעֲבוֹדַת מַתָּנָה וְלֹא עֲבוֹדַת סִילּוּק. הָא בַּחוּץ — אֲפִילּוּ עֲבוֹדַת סִילּוּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**“To that within the veil; and you shall serve;** I give you the priesthood as a service of gift” (Numbers 18:7), indicating that it is only with regard to services that are performed **within the veil,** i.e., in the Holy of Holies, **that there is** a distinction between services, and a non-priest who performs **services of giving** there, such as sprinkling the blood inside the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur, is subject to the death penalty, **but not** one who performs **services of removing** there, such as the removal of the censer from the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur. **This** leads to the conclusion that when it comes to services performed **outside** of the Holy of Holies, a non-priest would be liable if he performed any service, **even a service of removal,** such as the removal of ashes from the altar.


###### Yoma 24b:2
[Yoma 24b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:2)

אִי הָכִי, ״וַעֲבַדְתֶּם״ נָמֵי, ״אֶל מִבֵּית לַפָּרוֹכֶת״ הוּא דַּעֲבוֹדָה תַּמָּה וְלֹא עֲבוֹדָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ אַחֲרֶיהָ עֲבוֹדָה. הָא בַּחוּץ — אֲפִילּוּ עֲבוֹדָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ אַחֲרֶיהָ עֲבוֹדָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If** it is **so** that the limitations of the verse apply only to those services performed in the Holy of Holies, one should say that the phrase: “**And you shall serve [*va’avadtem*],”** from which it is derived that one is liable only for a service that is complete [*avoda tamma*] on its own and not incomplete, should **also** be similarly limited to services performed **to what is within the veil.** In that case, the liability of the non-priest, which is limited to cases where he performs **a complete service and** does **not** apply if he performs **a service that** is only preparatory and **has another service after it** that completes its purpose, should apply only to services performed in the Holy of Holies. **But** for services performed **outside** the Holy of Holies, a non-priest should be liable **even** if it is **a service that** is incomplete and **has a service after it.**


###### Yoma 24b:3
[Yoma 24b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:3)

״וַעֲבַדְתֶּם״ הֲדַר עָרְבֵיהּ קְרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The phrase: “**And you shall serve [*va’avadtem*],”** which begins with the conjunction *vav*, meaning: And, indicates that **the verse goes back and combines** the service performed within the veil to services performed outside of it. This teaches that with regard to this *halakha* there is no difference between a service performed outside and a service performed inside.


###### Yoma 24b:4
[Yoma 24b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:4)

בָּעֵי רָבָא: עֲבוֹדַת סִילּוּק בַּהֵיכָל, מַהוּ? לִפְנִים מְדַמֵּינַן לֵיהּ, אוֹ לְחוּץ מְדַמֵּינַן לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
According to Levi, if a non-priest performs a service involving removal within the veil, i.e., in the Holy of Holies, he does not incur the death penalty, but if he performs a service involving removal outside, such as the removal of the ashes from the external altar, he is liable to the death penalty. **Rava raised a dilemma** relating to Levi’s approach: **What** would be the *halakha* with regard to **a service of removal** performed **in the Sanctuary** chamber that is before the Holy of Holies, such as removing the burnt incense from the inner altar, or removing burnt wicks and leftover oil from the candelabrum? Do **we compare** such an act **to** a service performed **inside** the Holy of Holies, so that he would be exempt from the death penalty, **or** do **we compare** it **to the outer** service?


###### Yoma 24b:5
[Yoma 24b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:5)

הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ: ״מִבֵּית״, ״וּלְמִבֵּית״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava himself **went back and resolved** the dilemma: Had the Torah said only: **Within** the veil, it would have been understood that it is referring only to actions performed in the Holy of Holies. But since the Torah says: **And to what is within** the veil, the added conjunction: And, teaches that it is referring to something else besides the Holy of Holies, i.e., the Sanctuary.


###### Yoma 24b:6
[Yoma 24b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:6)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, זָר שֶׁסִּידֵּר אֶת הַשֻּׁלְחָן לִיחַיַּיב! אִיכָּא סִידּוּר בָּזִיכִין. סִידֵּר בָּזִיכִין לִיחַיַּיב! אִיכָּא סִילּוּק וְהַקְטָרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **However, if** it is **so** that a non-priest is liable for performing a service that is complete on its own that takes place in the Sanctuary, one should say that **a non-priest who arranges the** loaves on the shewbread **table should be liable.** The Gemara answers: After arranging the bread **there is** still the **arranging of the vessels** of frankincense on the table that remains to be done, so the arrangement of the bread is not a service that is complete on its own. The Gemara asks: If so, **a non-priest who arranges the vessels** of frankincense on the table **should be liable.** The Gemara rejects this: After arranging the vessels, **there is** still the **removal** of these vessels **and the burning** of their frankincense on the altar that remain to be done; therefore, arranging the vessels is not considered a service that is complete on its own.


###### Yoma 24b:7
[Yoma 24b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:7)

זָר שֶׁסִּידֵּר אֶת הַמְנוֹרָה לִיחַיַּיב! אִיכָּא נְתִינַת פְּתִילָה. נָתַן פְּתִילָה לִיחַיַּיב! אִיכָּא נְתִינַת שֶׁמֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks further with regard to the notion that a non-priest is liable for performing a service that is complete on its own that takes place in the Sanctuary: If so, **a non-priest who arranges the** lamps of the **candelabrum should be liable.** The Gemara rejects this: **There is** still the **placing of the wicks** in the lamps that remains to be done, so arranging the lamps is not considered a service that is complete on its own. The Gemara asks: If so, a non-priest who **placed a wick** in the candelabrum’s lamps **should be liable.** The Gemara answers: That too is not a service that is complete on its own, as **there is** still the necessity of **placing the oil.**


###### Yoma 24b:8
[Yoma 24b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:8)

נָתַן שֶׁמֶן לִיחַיַּיב! אִיכָּא הַדְלָקָה. הִדְלִיק לִיחַיַּיב! הַדְלָקָה לָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If so, a non-priest who **placed the oil should be liable.** The Gemara answers: That too is not a service that is complete on its own, as **there is** still the service of **lighting** that needs to be done. The Gemara asks: If so, if a non-priest **who lit** the lamps **should be liable.** The Gemara answers: **Lighting** the lamps **is not** considered a bona fide Temple **service,** since in doing so nothing is done to the candelabrum itself.


###### Yoma 24b:9
[Yoma 24b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:9)

וְלָא? וְהָתַנְיָא: ״וְנָתְנוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן אֵשׁ עַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְעָרְכוּ עֵצִים עַל הָאֵשׁ״, לִימֵּד עַל הַצָּתַת אֲלִיתָא שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא אֶלָּא בְּכֹהֵן כָּשֵׁר וּבִכְלִי שָׁרֵת! הַצָּתַת אֲלִיתָא — עֲבוֹדָה הִיא, הַדְלָקָה — לָאו עֲבוֹדָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And is** kindling a fire really **not** considered a Temple service? **But wasn’t it taught** in a *baraita* that it is written: **“And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar and lay out wood in order upon the fire”** (Leviticus 1:7), which **teaches that the kindling of chips [*alita*]** added to keep the altar’s fire going must **be performed only by a proper priest and** that he must be wearing **the priestly garments?** This shows that kindling is considered a service. The Gemara answers: **Kindling** the **chips is a** bona fide **service,** but **lighting** the candelabrum is **not** a bona fide **service.**


###### Yoma 24b:10
[Yoma 24b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:10)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, זָר שֶׁסִּידֵּר אֶת הַמַּעֲרָכָה לִיחַיַּיב! אִיכָּא סִידּוּר שְׁנֵי גְּזִירֵי עֵצִים. סִידֵּר שְׁנֵי גְזִירִין לִיחַיַּיב! אִיכָּא סִידּוּר אֵבָרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further asks: **However, if** it is **so** that a non-priest is liable for performing any service involving placing, as established above, **a non-priest who set up the arrangement** of wood on the altar **should be liable,** since that is a service involving placing. The Gemara answers: **There is** still **the** mitzva of the **arrangement of two logs** on the altar that remains to be done, so that setting up the arrangement of wood is not a service that is complete on its own. The Gemara asks: If so, a non-priest who **arranged the two logs should be liable.** The Gemara answers: **There is** still **the arrangement of limbs** of offerings on the fire that remains to be done, so placing the two logs is also not considered a service that is complete on its own.


###### Yoma 24b:11
[Yoma 24b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:11)

וְהָא אָמַר רַב אַסִּי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: זָר שֶׁסִּידֵּר שְׁנֵי גְּזִירֵי עֵצִים חַיָּיב! בְּהָא פְּלִיגִי, מָר סָבַר: עֲבוֹדָה תַּמָּה הִיא, וּמָר סָבַר: לָאו עֲבוֹדָה תַּמָּה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But didn’t Rav Asi say** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: A non-priest who arranged the two pieces of wood is liable?** This shows that placing the two logs is a complete service and contradicts Rav’s statement that a non-priest is liable only if he performs the four services that he mentioned above. The Gemara answers: Indeed, Rav and Rabbi Yoḥanan **disagree on this** point. **One Sage,** Rabbi Yoḥanan, **holds** that the placement of the two logs **is a service that is complete** on its own, as the arrangement of limbs that follows is not considered a continuation of the setting up of the wood; **and one Sage,** Rav, **holds** that the placement of the two logs **is not** considered **a service that is complete** on its own, since it is followed by the arrangement of the limbs on the wood.


###### Yoma 24b:12
[Yoma 24b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:12)

תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב, תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּלֵוִי. תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב: עֲבוֹדוֹת שֶׁזָּר חַיָּיב עֲלֵיהֶם מִיתָה: זְרִיקַת דָּם בֵּין לְפָנִים בֵּין לִפְנַי וְלִפְנִים, וְהַמַּזֶּה בְּחַטַּאת הָעוֹף, וְהַמְמַצֶּה, וְהַמַּקְטִיר בְּעוֹלַת הָעוֹף, וְהַמְנַסֵּךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה לוּגִּין מַיִם, וּשְׁלֹשָׁה לוּגִּין יַיִן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to the disagreement between Rav and Levi and notes: **It was taught** in a *baraita* **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav,** and **it was taught** in a second *baraita* **in accordance with** the opinion of **Levi. It was taught** in a *baraita* **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav:** These are the **services for which a non-priest** who performs them **is liable to** receive the penalty of **death** by God’s hand: One who performs **the sprinkling of blood, whether inside** the Sanctuary; on the golden altar or at the veil; **or inside the innermost** chamber, the Holy of Holies, on Yom Kippur; or outside on the main altar; **and one who sprinkles** blood in the case of a **bird sin-offering; and one who squeezes** the blood of **a bird burnt-offering** on the wall of the altar **or burns** the bird on the altar; **and one who pours out three *log* of water** on the altar for the *Sukkot* water libation **or three *log* of wine** on the altar for an ordinary libation. The removal of ashes from the altar is not listed here.


###### Yoma 24b:13
[Yoma 24b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:13)

תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּלֵוִי: עֲבוֹדוֹת שֶׁזָּר חַיָּיב עֲלֵיהֶן מִיתָה: הַמֵּרִים אֶת הַדֶּשֶׁן, וְשֶׁבַע הַזָּאוֹת שֶׁבִּפְנִים, וְשֶׁבִּמְצוֹרָע, וְהַמַּעֲלֶה עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ בֵּין דָּבָר כָּשֵׁר בֵּין דָּבָר פָּסוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was taught** in a *baraita* **in accordance with** the opinion of **Levi:** These are the **services for which a non-priest** who performs them **is liable to** receive the penalty of **death** by God’s hand: **One who removes the ashes** from the altar; one who performs **the seven sprinklings that are** performed **inside** the Sanctuary **or** the sprinklings **of the leper; and one who raises up** an offering **onto the altar, whether it is** a **proper** offering **or** a **disqualified** one. In this *baraita*, the removal of ashes is listed.


###### Yoma 24b:14
[Yoma 24b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:14)

לָמָּה מְפַיְּסִין? לָמָּה מְפַיְּסִין?! כְּדַאֲמַרַן! אֶלָּא: לָמָּה מְפַיְּסִין וְחוֹזְרִין וּמְפַיְּסִין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara returns to its interpretation of the mishna. The mishna states that there were four lotteries held in the Temple every day. One of the Sages asked: **Why did** the Temple authorities **hold lotteries?** Before answering the question, the Gemara expresses astonishment at the question itself: **Why did they hold lotteries?** The reason is **as we said** clearly in the mishna: To prevent quarrels among the priests. The Gemara explains: **Rather,** this is the meaning of the question: **Why did they** assemble all the priests together and **hold a lottery, and once again** gather them together to **hold another lottery,** four times, when the priests could be gathered one time and all the necessary lotteries held at that time?


###### Yoma 24b:15
[Yoma 24b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:15)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּדֵי לְהַרְגִּישׁ כׇּל הָעֲזָרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אֲשֶׁר יַחְדָּיו נַמְתִּיק סוֹד בְּבֵית אֱלֹהִים נְהַלֵּךְ בְּרָגֶשׁ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** It was done this way **in order to create a commotion throughout** the Temple **courtyard,** as the priests would converge from all over to assemble there, **as it is stated: “We took sweet counsel together, in the House of God we walked with the throng”** (Psalms 55:15). This verse teaches that it is proper to stir up a commotion and to cause public excitement in the course of the Temple services and the preliminary steps leading up to them, such as the assignment of tasks to the priests.


###### Yoma 24b:16
[Yoma 24b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:16)

בַּמֶּה מְפַיְּסִין? רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: בְּבִגְדֵי חוֹל, וְרַב שֵׁשֶׁת אָמַר: בְּבִגְדֵי קֹדֶשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **With what** garments were the priests clothed when **they held the lottery? Rav Naḥman said:** The priests were clothed in their own **non-sacred garments. And Rav Sheshet said:** The priests were dressed in the priestly **sacred garments.**


###### Yoma 24b:17
[Yoma 24b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:17)

רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: בְּבִגְדֵי חוֹל, דְּאִי אָמְרַתְּ בְּבִגְדֵי קֹדֶשׁ, אִיכָּא בַּעֲלֵי זְרוֹעוֹת דְּחָמְסִי וְעָבְדִי. רַב שֵׁשֶׁת אָמַר: בְּבִגְדֵי קֹדֶשׁ, דְּאִי אָמְרַתְּ בְּבִגְדֵי חוֹל, אַגַּב חַבִּיבוּתֵיהּ מִיקְּרוּ וְעָבְדִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the two approaches. **Rav Naḥman said:** The priests were dressed in **non-sacred garments, because if you say** the lottery was to be held when they were dressed in their **sacred garments, there are** strong-**armed men who might act with force and perform the service** even if they did not win the lottery. Since they were already wearing the sacred garments, they would simply force their way into performing the service. **Rav Sheshet said:** They were wearing the **sacred garments, as, if you say** they wore their **non-sacred garments, due to** the fact that the service was so **beloved** to them, in their excitement over having been granted the privilege to perform the service, **it may happen** that **they would perform the service** immediately, forgetting to don their sacred garments, thereby disqualifying the service.


###### Yoma 24b:18
[Yoma 24b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/24b:18)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: מְנָא אָמֵינָא לַהּ, דִּתְנַן: מְסָרוּן לַחַזָּנִין וְהָיוּ מַפְשִׁיטִין אוֹתָן אֶת בִּגְדֵיהֶן, וְלֹא הָיוּ מַנִּיחִין עֲלֵיהֶן אֶלָּא מִכְנָסַיִם בִּלְבַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman said: From where do I state** my opinion? **As we learned** in a mishna: After the lottery **they gave** the priests **over to the attendants, and they would take their clothes off them and they would leave only** their **trousers on them.**