## Yoma Daf 25b

###### Yoma 25b:1
[Yoma 25b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:1)

תָּא שְׁמַע, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: לֹא הָיָה פַּיִיס לַמַּחְתָּה, אֶלָּא כֹּהֵן שֶׁזָּכָה בִּקְטֹרֶת אוֹמֵר לָזֶה שֶׁעִמּוֹ ״זְכֵה עִמִּי בַּמַּחְתָּה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a proof from a *baraita*: **Rabbi Yehuda says:** When the third lottery was held to determine who would perform the burning of the incense, **there was no** separate **lottery** held for carrying **the coal pan,** although a second priest was required to rake up coals from the outer altar, carry them in a coal pan, and put them on the inner altar, where the priest assigned the task of burning the incense would then place the incense onto the coals. **Rather, the priest who won** the privilege **of the incense said to the one who was next to him: Be privileged along with me with** the task of carrying **the coal pan.** This shows that each individual service did not have its own lottery; rather, the other priests adjacent to the winner of the lottery were automatically chosen for the ancillary tasks.


###### Yoma 25b:2
[Yoma 25b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:2)

שָׁאנֵי מַחְתָּה וּקְטֹרֶת, דַּחֲדָא עֲבוֹדָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **The** tasks of carrying the **coal pan and** burning the **incense are different, because** together **they are** considered as **a single service,** so that a single lottery determined the participants for the two tasks.


###### Yoma 25b:3
[Yoma 25b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:3)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: דַּוְקָא מַחְתָּה וּקְטֹרֶת דַּחֲדָא עֲבוֹדָה הִיא, אֲבָל שְׁאָר עֲבוֹדוֹת בָּעֵי פַּיִיס!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** that this *baraita* was brought to derive the opposite conclusion: It was **specifically** concerning the case of carrying **the coal pan and** burning **the incense, which are** considered as two parts of **one** and the same **service,** that Rabbi Yehuda said one lottery can be used to assign the two tasks. **However,** the implication is that **other services,** which are not interrelated in this manner, **require a lottery** for each and every separate task. If Rabbi Yehuda had meant this to be a general principle, why did he mention the specific example of the coal pan and the incense?


###### Yoma 25b:4
[Yoma 25b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:4)

מַחְתָּה אִצְטְרִיכָא לֵיהּ, סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא הוֹאִיל וְלָא שְׁכִיחָא, וּמְעַתְּרָא, נַתְקֵין לַהּ פַּיִיס בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ. קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This argument is rejected: That is not a proof that other services require their own lotteries. The reason Rabbi Yehuda mentioned this specific example is that **it was necessary for him** to teach explicitly that the coal pan and the burning of the incense do not have separate lotteries but a single, combined lottery. It might **have entered your mind to say that since** the burning of incense **is infrequent,** being performed only twice a day, unlike other offerings, which may be donated by private individuals and brought many times a day, **and** also since **it brings about wealth** for whoever performs it, as the Gemara teaches later, **we should institute a** separate **lottery for** bringing in the coal pan **itself,** as many priests wished to perform this task. Therefore, Rabbi Yehuda **teaches us** that despite this, the bringing in of the coal pan does not have its own lottery. Consequently, there is no proof either way from this *baraita*.


###### Yoma 25b:5
[Yoma 25b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתָנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: לֹא לְכׇל עֲבוֹדָה וַעֲבוֹדָה מְפַיְּיסִין, אֶלָּא כֹּהֵן שֶׁזָּכָה בְּתָמִיד, שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים נִמְשָׁכִין עִמּוֹ. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a proof from what **Rabbi Ḥiyya taught** explicitly in a *baraita*: **A lottery is not held for each individual service; rather,** beginning with the **priest who won the lottery of the daily offering, twelve of his fellow priests,** those standing next to him, **are drawn in along with him** to perform the other acts of the daily offering. The Gemara concludes: **Learn from this** that it is so.


###### Yoma 25b:6
[Yoma 25b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:6)

פַּיִיס הַשֵּׁנִי וְכוּ׳. אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: מִי מְקַבֵּל? שׁוֹחֵט מְקַבֵּל, דְּאִי אָמְרַתְּ זוֹרֵק מְקַבֵּל — אַגַּב חַבִּיבוּתֵיהּ, לָא מְקַבֵּל לֵיהּ לְכוּלֵּיהּ דָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It was taught in the mishna: **The second lottery** determines who slaughters, who sprinkles the blood, etc. The task of collecting the blood in a vessel, which is between slaughtering and sprinkling, is not mentioned. Therefore, it must be assumed that either the priest who slaughtered or the priest who sprinkled the blood was assigned this task as well. **A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: **Who collects** the blood? Is it the one who **slaughters** the offering who also **collects** the blood? The reason to support this conclusion is **that if you say** that the one who **sprinkles** the blood is the one who **collects** it, a situation might arise in which, **due to** his enthusiasm and **his love** for the mitzva of sprinkling, a service that is considered more important than collecting because it directly involves the altar, the priest might **not collect all the blood** as the *halakha* requires but would hurry to go on and sprinkle it after he has collected only some of the blood.


###### Yoma 25b:7
[Yoma 25b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:7)

אוֹ דִילְמָא: זוֹרֵק מְקַבֵּל, דְּאִי אָמְרַתְּ שׁוֹחֵט מְקַבֵּל — זִימְנִין דְּשָׁחֵיט זָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Or perhaps** one should draw the opposite conclusion, that it is the one who **sprinkles** that **collects** the blood, **as, if you say** that the one who **slaughters** is the one who **collects,** this principle could not be universally applied, as **sometimes a non-priest slaughters** the offering. Slaughtering offerings is not a sacred service and may be performed by anyone, unlike the collection of the blood, which is performed by a priest. In those cases when a non-priest slaughtered the daily offering, he would not be able to collect the blood.


###### Yoma 25b:8
[Yoma 25b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:8)

תָּא שְׁמַע: בֶּן קָטִין עָשָׂה שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר דַּד לַכִּיּוֹר, כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיוּ שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים הָעֲסוּקִין בַּתָּמִיד מְקַדְּשִׁין יְדֵיהֶן וְרַגְלֵיהֶן בְּבַת אַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites a source as evidence for one side of the argument: **Come** and **hear** from that which was taught in a mishna: **Ben Katin made twelve spigots for the** large **laver** to replace the original two spouts that were there, **so that his twelve fellow priests who were engaged in** the sacrifice of **the daily offering could** all **sanctify their hands and feet at one time.** Although there are thirteen participants listed in the mishna, the slaughterer of the offering was not required to sanctify his hands and feet because, as mentioned above, slaughtering is not a sacred service. Therefore, only twelve spigots were needed.


###### Yoma 25b:9
[Yoma 25b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:9)

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ שׁוֹחֵט מְקַבֵּל, תְּלֵיסַר הָוֵי! אֶלָּא לָאו שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: זוֹרֵק מְקַבֵּל. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if it should enter your mind** to say that the one who **slaughters** is the one who **collects** the blood, then **there are** sometimes **thirteen** participants, so thirteen spigots should be needed. On those occasions when a non-priest slaughtered the daily offering, an extra priest would be required to come and collect its blood. Since the collection of blood is a sacred service, it too requires sanctification of the hands and feet. **Rather,** since there were only twelve spigots, **isn’t it** correct to **conclude from this** that it is the one who **sprinkles,** and not the one who slaughters, who **collects** the blood? The Gemara concludes: **Conclude from this** that it is so.


###### Yoma 25b:10
[Yoma 25b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי, אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: שָׁחַט הַשּׁוֹחֵט, וְקִבֵּל הַמְקַבֵּל, וּבָא לוֹ לִזְרוֹק. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: We too have learned** a support for this conclusion in a mishna that gives the sequence of the services for the daily offering: **The slaughterer** of the offering **slaughtered, the collector** of its blood **collected, and he** then **comes to sprinkle** the blood. The wording indicates that the one who collects the blood is also the one who subsequently sprinkles it. The Gemara concludes: **Conclude from this** that it is so.


###### Yoma 25b:11
[Yoma 25b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:11)

אָמַר בֶּן עַזַּאי לִפְנֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְכוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: כֵּיצַד דֶּרֶךְ הִלּוּכוֹ? הָרֹאשׁ וְהָרֶגֶל, הֶחָזֶה וְהַגֵּרָה, וּשְׁתֵּי יָדַיִם, וּשְׁתֵּי דְפָנוֹת, הָעוֹקֶץ וְהָרֶגֶל. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: דֶּרֶךְ הֶפְשֵׁטוֹ הָיָה קָרֵב. כֵּיצַד דֶּרֶךְ הֶפְשֵׁטוֹ? הָרֹאשׁ וְהָרֶגֶל, הָעוֹקֶץ וְהָרֶגֶל, וּשְׁתֵּי דְפָנוֹת, וּשְׁתֵּי הַיָּדַיִם, הֶחָזֶה וְהַגֵּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states that **ben Azzai said before Rabbi Akiva** in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua that the sequence for carrying up the animal’s limbs was based on the way it walks when alive, meaning that its front parts are taken up first. **The Sages taught** in the *Tosefta*: **In what manner** is the animal brought up according to **the way it walks?** It is in this manner: **The head and the** right hind **leg** are brought up first. The other parts follow this sequence: **The breast and the neck, and** then **the two forelegs, and** then **the two flanks,** then **the tail and the** left hind **leg. Rabbi Yosei says: It was sacrificed** according to **the way it was skinned. In what manner** is the animal brought up according to **the way it was skinned?** It is in this manner: **The head and the** right **leg** are brought first, then **the tail and the** left **leg** together, then the **two flanks, and** then **the two forelegs,** then **the breast and the neck.**


###### Yoma 25b:12
[Yoma 25b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:12)

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: דֶּרֶךְ נִיתּוּחוֹ הָיָה קָרֵב. כֵּיצַד דֶּרֶךְ נִיתּוּחוֹ? הָרֹאשׁ וְהָרֶגֶל, וּשְׁתֵּי יָדַיִם, הֶחָזֶה וְהַגֵּרָה, וּשְׁתֵּי דְפָנוֹת, וְהָעוֹקֶץ וְהָרֶגֶל. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: דֶּרֶךְ עִילּוּיוֹ הָיָה קָרֵב. כֵּיצַד דֶּרֶךְ עִילּוּיוֹ? הָרֹאשׁ וְהָרֶגֶל, הֶחָזֶה וְהַגֵּרָה, וּשְׁתֵּי הַדְּפָנוֹת, וְהָעוֹקֶץ וְהָרֶגֶל, וּשְׁתֵּי הַיָּדַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Akiva says: It was sacrificed** according to **the way it was cut up** into limbs after the skinning. **In what manner** is the animal brought up according to **the way it was cut up?** It is in this manner: **The head and the** right **leg** first, **and** then **the two forelegs,** then **the breast and the neck, and** then **the two flanks, and** then **the tail and the** left **leg. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: It was sacrificed according to** the **quality** of its various sections, so that the best pieces were taken up first. **In what manner** is the animal brought up according to **the quality** of the pieces? It is in this manner: **The head and the** right **leg,** then **the breast and the neck, and** then **the two flanks,** then **the tail and the** left **leg, and** then the **two forelegs.**


###### Yoma 25b:13
[Yoma 25b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:13)

וְהָכְתִיב: ״כׇּל נֵתַח טוֹב יָרֵךְ וְכָתֵף״? הָהִיא בִּכְחוּשָׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara poses a question with regard to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili’s position: **But isn’t it written: “Every good piece, the thigh and the shoulder”** (Ezekiel 24:4), indicating that these are the best cuts of the animal? Why doesn’t Rabbi Yosei HaGelili say that these are offered first (Rabbeinu Ḥananel)? The Gemara answers: **That** verse is speaking of a **lean** sheep, whose thigh and shoulder are indeed the best pieces. However, in the sheep brought for the daily offering, which were of the finest quality, there were other parts that were of higher quality.


###### Yoma 25b:14
[Yoma 25b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:14)

אָמַר רָבָא: בֵּין תַּנָּא דִּידַן וּבֵין רַבִּי יוֹסֵי — בָּתַר עִילּוּיָא דְבִשְׂרָא אָזְלִינַן. מָר אָזֵיל בָּתַר אִיבְרָא דְבִישְׂרָא, וּמָר אָזֵיל בָּתַר שֻׁמְנָא דְבִישְׂרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the reason behind the order of the pieces in the mishna. **Rava said: Both the *tanna*** of **our** mishna **and Rabbi Yosei** HaGelili agree that **we follow the** relative **quality of the meat** in the various pieces. The difference in opinion between them is that one **Sage,** the *tanna* of this mishna, **follows the limb,** i.e., the amount, **of the meat;** the other **Sage,** Rabbi Yosei, **follows the fattiness of the meat.**


###### Yoma 25b:15
[Yoma 25b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:15)

מַאי טַעְמָא סָלְקָא רֶגֶל בַּהֲדֵי רֵישָׁא? מִשּׁוּם דְּרֵישָׁא נְפִישִׁי בֵּיהּ עֲצָמוֹת, קָרְבָא רֶגֶל בַּהֲדֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: According to all opinions, **what is the reason that** the right **leg goes up** to the altar **together with the head?** What is the connection between these two pieces? The Gemara explains: **Because the head has much bone in it, the leg is offered with it.**


###### Yoma 25b:16
[Yoma 25b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/25b:16)

דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִיהַת רֹאשׁ קָרֵב בְּרֵישָׁא, מְנָא לַן? דְּתַנְיָא: מִנַּיִין לְרֹאשׁ וּפֶדֶר שֶׁקּוֹדְמִין לְכׇל הָאֵבָרִים — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְאֶת פִּדְרוֹ וְעָרַךְ״. וְאִידַּךְ: ״פָּדֶר״ אַחֲרִינָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks further: Although the Sages disagree as to the order of bringing up the various pieces, **at any rate everyone agrees** that the **head is sacrificed first. From where do we** derive this? **As it was taught** in a *baraita*: **From where** is it derived **that** when sacrificing an animal **the head and the fat precede all the** other **limbs? The verse states:** “And he shall cut it up into its pieces **and its head and its fat, and** the priest **shall arrange** them on the wood that is on the fire upon the altar” (Leviticus 1:12). The Gemara asks: **And the other** mention of **fat** before this, where the verse states: “The pieces, the head and the fat” (Leviticus 1:8),