## Yoma Daf 2b

###### Yoma 2b:1
[Yoma 2b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:1)

וְאֵימָא, ״צִוָּה״ [״צִוָּה״] דְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיַּעַשׂ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה׳ אֶת מֹשֶׁה״? דָּנִין ״צִוָּה״ דְּלִפְנֵי עֲשִׂיָּה מִ״צִּוָּה״ דְּלִפְנֵי עֲשִׂיָּה, וְאֵין דָּנִין ״צִוָּה״ דִּלְאַחַר עֲשִׂיָּה מִ״צִּוָּה״ דְּלִפְנֵי עֲשִׂיָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And say** that there is indeed a verbal analogy; however, it is not between the red heifer and the inauguration of the priests, but between the term **commanded** in the context of the inauguration and the term **commanded** in the context **of Yom Kippur, as it is written:** “And this will be an everlasting statute for you, to atone for the children of Israel for all their sins once a year; **and he did as the Lord commanded Moses”** (Leviticus 16:34). In that case, only the sequestering prior to Yom Kippur can be derived. The Gemara rejects this, as a verbal analogy is derived only between functionally similar phrases. **One derives commanded that is** stated **before performance,** as in the portion of the heifer, **from commanded that is** stated **before performance** in the portion of the inauguration; **and one does not derive commanded that is** stated **after performance** in the portion of Yom Kippur **from commanded that is** stated **before performance.**


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

וְאֵימָא ״צִוָּה״ דְּקׇרְבָּנוֹת, דִּכְתִיב: ״בְּיוֹם צַוֹּתוֹ אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״? דָּנִין ״צִוָּה״ מִ״צִּוָּה״ וְאֵין דָּנִין ״צַוֹּתוֹ״ מִ״צִּוָּה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Again the Gemara asks: **And say** that there is a verbal analogy between the term commanded in the context of the inauguration and the term **commanded** with regard to **offerings, as it is written: “On the day that He commanded [*tzavoto*] the children of Israel** to sacrifice their offerings” (Leviticus 7:38). The result would be that any priest sacrificing a communal offering would require sequestering for seven days. The Gemara rejects this: **One derives** the term **commanded from** the identical term **commanded, and one does not derive** the term **that he commanded [*tzavoto*] from** the term **commanded [*tziva*].**


###### Yoma 2b:3
[Yoma 2b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:3)

וּמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ? וְהָתָנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: ״וְשָׁב הַכֹּהֵן״ ״וּבָא הַכֹּהֵן״, זוֹ הִיא ״שִׁיבָה״, זוֹ הִיא ״בִּיאָה״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **What is the practical difference** between the two terms? **Didn’t the school of Rabbi Yishmael teach** a verbal analogy with regard to leprosy of houses between the verse: **“And the priest shall return [*veshav*]”** (Leviticus 14:39) and the verse: **“And the priest shall come [*uva*]”** (Leviticus 14:44)? From that verbal analogy it is derived that **this is** the *halakha* with regard to **returning,** i.e., it is after seven days; and **this is** the same *halakha* with regard to **coming,** i.e., it is also after seven days. Obviously, the less pronounced difference in grammatical forms between *tziva* and *tzavoto* should not prevent the teaching of a verbal analogy.


###### Yoma 2b:4
[Yoma 2b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:4)

הָנֵי מִילֵּי, הֵיכָא דְּלֵיכָּא דְּדָמֵי לֵיהּ. אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּאִיכָּא דְּדָמֵי לֵיהּ — מִדְּדָמֵי לֵיהּ יָלְפִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **This applies** only **where there are no** terms **that are identical to it; however, where there are terms that are identical to it, we derive** the verbal analogy **from** terms **that are identical to it,** rather than from terms that are merely similar.


###### Yoma 2b:5
[Yoma 2b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:5)

״לְכַפֵּר״ אֵלּוּ מַעֲשֵׂה יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. וְאֵימָא כַּפָּרָה דְּקׇרְבָּנוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara analyzes the verbal analogy from which the sequestering of the High Priest is derived. The Gemara states with regard to the phrase **“to make atonement,”** written in the context of the inauguration: **These are the actions** performed on **Yom Kippur.** The Gemara suggests: **And say** that it refers to **the atonement of offerings** in general, such that any priest engaged in sacrificing atonement offerings must be sequestered seven days beforehand.


###### Yoma 2b:6
[Yoma 2b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:6)

מִי יָדְעִינַן הֵי כֹּהֵן מִתְרְמֵי, דְּבָעֵי לֵיהּ פְּרִישָׁה? אָמְרִי, אַלְּמָה לָא?! נִיבְעֵי לֵיהּ פְּרִישָׁה לְכוּלֵּיהּ מִשְׁמֶרֶת בֵּית אָב! דָּנִין דָּבָר שֶׁקָּבוּעַ לוֹ זְמַן מִדָּבָר שֶׁקָּבוּעַ לוֹ זְמַן, לְאַפּוֹקֵי קׇרְבָּנוֹת, דְּכׇל יוֹמָא אִיתַנְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara seeks to reject this suggestion from a practical perspective. **Do we know** in advance **which priest will happen** to sacrifice a given offering, and **who** would consequently **require sequestering?** The Sages **say: Why not?** There are certainly ways to do so. Each of the twenty-four priestly watches has set weeks during which it serves in the Temple, and the patrilineal families that constitute that watch have set days during that week on which each serves in the Temple. **We could require sequestering for the entire patrilineal family of the** priestly **watch** designated to serve on that day the following week. The Gemara rejects the suggestion that all priests should be sequestered prior to sacrificing an atonement offering. **We derive a matter that has a fixed time** during the year, Yom Kippur, **from a matter that** also **has a fixed time,** the inauguration of the priests for service in the Tabernacle, **to the exclusion of offerings that are** sacrificed **every day.**


###### Yoma 2b:7
[Yoma 2b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:7)

וְאֵימָא רְגָלִים! דָּנִין דָּבָר שֶׁנּוֹהֵג פַּעַם אַחַת בַּשָּׁנָה מִדָּבָר הַנּוֹהֵג פַּעַם אַחַת בַּשָּׁנָה, לְאַפּוֹקֵי רְגָלִים, דְּלָאו פַּעַם אַחַת בַּשָּׁנָה נִינְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Again the Gemara asks: **And say** that one derives from the phrase “to make atonement” the principle of sequestering prior to sacrificing atonement offerings on the **Festivals,** which have fixed times. The Gemara rejects this: **We derive a matter that is performed once a year,** the service of Yom Kippur, **from a matter that is performed once a year,** like the inauguration, which was a one-time event, **to the exclusion of** the service on the **Festivals, which is not** performed **once a year;** rather, it is performed three times a year.


###### Yoma 2b:8
[Yoma 2b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:8)

וְאֵימָא רֶגֶל אֶחָד! וְכִי תֵּימָא: לָא יָדְעִינַן הֵי מִינַּיְיהוּ, אִי חַג הַמַּצּוֹת, הוֹאִיל וּפָתַח בּוֹ הַכָּתוּב תְּחִלָּה, אִי חַג הַסּוּכּוֹת, הוֹאִיל וּמְרוּבָּה מִצְוָתוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And say** that the service on **one Festival** of the three, which is performed once a year, should require sequestering. **And if you say: We do not know which of them** is the most significant and requires sequestering, since one could suggest that it is **Passover, with which the verse opened,** as the Torah always lists it first among the Festivals; **or** one could suggest that it is ***Sukkot*, since its mitzva** is to bring **numerous** offerings, many more than the number brought on the other Festivals.


###### Yoma 2b:9
[Yoma 2b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:9)

אֶלָּא: דָּנִין פְּרִישַׁת שִׁבְעָה לְיוֹם אֶחָד, מִפְּרִישַׁת שִׁבְעָה לְיוֹם אֶחָד. וְאֵין דָּנִין פְּרִישַׁת שִׁבְעָה לְשִׁבְעָה, מִפְּרִישַׁת שִׁבְעָה לְיוֹם אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the Gemara rejects this possibility and explains: **One derives sequestering for seven days** prior to performing a service **for one day,** Yom Kippur, **from sequestering for seven days** prior to performing a service **for one day,** the inauguration. **And one does not derive sequestering for seven days** prior to performing a service **for seven** days, a Festival, **from sequestering for seven days** prior to performing a service **for one day,** the inauguration. Therefore, atonement offerings on Festivals are not derived from the inauguration.


###### Yoma 2b:10
[Yoma 2b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:10)

וְאֵימָא שְׁמִינִי, דִּפְרִישַׁת שִׁבְעָה לְיוֹם אֶחָד הוּא! דָּנִין דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין קְדוּשָּׁה לְפָנָיו מִדָּבָר שֶׁאֵין קְדוּשָּׁה לְפָנָיו, וְאֵין דָּנִין דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְדוּשָּׁה לְפָנָיו מִדָּבָר שֶׁאֵין קְדוּשָּׁה לְפָנָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And say** that the sequestering for seven days is prior to the festival of the **Eighth** Day of Assembly, as that would also be **sequestering for seven days** prior to performing a service **for one day.** The Gemara rejects this: **One derives a matter before which there is not sanctity,** Yom Kippur, which is preceded by weekdays, **from a matter before which there is not sanctity,** the day of the inauguration, which was also preceded by weekdays. **And we do not derive a matter before which there is sanctity,** the Eighth Day of Assembly, which is preceded by the seven days of *Sukkot*, **from a matter before which there is not sanctity.**


###### Yoma 2b:11
[Yoma 2b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:11)

וְלָאו קַל וָחוֹמֶר הוּא? הַשְׁתָּא דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין קְדוּשָּׁה לְפָנָיו בָּעֵי פְּרִישָׁה, דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְדוּשָּׁה לְפָנָיו — לָא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן! אָמַר רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא: לָא, ״הַזֶּה״ כְּתִיב: כָּזֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges this: **And is it not an *a fortiori* inference? Now,** if **a matter before which there is not sanctity requires sequestering,** due to its sanctity, then with regard to **a matter before which there is sanctity, all the more so** is it **not** clear that it should require sequestering? **Rav Mesharshiyya said** in rejection of this challenge: **No,** there is no *a fortiori* inference here, as the verse: “As has been done **this** day, so the Lord has commanded to do, to make atonement for you” (Leviticus 8:34), **is written** to emphasize specifically a day **like this** day; precisely as it was for the inauguration, and not in any other situation.


###### Yoma 2b:12
[Yoma 2b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/2b:12)

רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: מִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דְּעִיקַּר רֶגֶל לָא בָּעֵי פְּרִישָׁה, טָפֵל דִּידֵיהּ בָּעֵי פְּרִישָׁה? וַאֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר שְׁמִינִי רֶגֶל בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ הוּא, הָנֵי מִילֵּי לְעִנְיַן

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi said:** There is another reason why it could not be that sequestering is required prior to the Eighth Day of Assembly. Is **there** any **matter where the primary Festival,** the first day of *Sukkot*, **does not require sequestering,** as was already proven, while that which is **secondary to it requires sequestering?** Since the Eighth Day of Assembly is an addendum to *Sukkot*, could its sanctity and stringency be greater than that which is associated with the primary Festival? **And even according to the one who said: The Eighth** Day of Assembly **is a Festival in and of itself** and is not part of the festival of *Sukkot*, **that applies only to the matter of**