## Yoma Daf 56b

###### Yoma 56b:1
[Yoma 56b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:1)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹסְרִין. אַלְמָא אֵין בְּרֵירָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Shimon prohibit** this practice. **Apparently,** Rabbi Yehuda maintains that **there is no** retroactive **clarification.**


###### Yoma 56b:2
[Yoma 56b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:2)

מִמַּאי? דִּילְמָא שָׁאנֵי הָתָם כִּדְקָתָנֵי טַעְמָא, אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר: אִי אַתָּה מוֹדֶה שֶׁמָּא יִבָּקַע הַנּוֹד וְנִמְצָא שׁוֹתֶה טְבָלִים לְמַפְרֵעַ? וְאָמַר לָהֶם: לִכְשֶׁיִּבָּקַע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the difficulty: **From where** do you reach this conclusion? **Perhaps it is different there, as the reason is taught:** The Rabbis **said to Rabbi Meir: Do you not concede** that **the jug might split open** before he removes the portions of *terumot* and tithes from the mixture, causing all the wine to spill out? **And he** will then **be found drinking untithed** wine **retroactively.** Therefore, he cannot rely on separation that has not yet occurred. **And he said to them:** Although there will be a problem **if it splits open,** there is no cause to be concerned for this contingency in advance. Since this reasoning is based on the possibility that the jug might break, there is no proof from here that Rabbi Yehuda rejects the principle of retroactive clarification.


###### Yoma 56b:3
[Yoma 56b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:3)

אֶלָּא, מִדְּתָנֵי אַיּוֹ. דְּתָנֵי אַיּוֹ, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֵין אָדָם מַתְנֶה עַל שְׁנֵי דְבָרִים כְּאֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the proof that Rabbi Yehuda does not accept the principle of retroactive clarification is **from** a *baraita* the Sage **Ayo taught. As Ayo taught** that **Rabbi Yehuda says: A person cannot stipulate conditions about two matters at once,** e. g., one cannot establish a joining of Shabbat boundaries [*eiruv*] in each of two different directions on Friday afternoon while making the following stipulation: If tomorrow, on Shabbat, two Sages arrive from two different directions, I will decide then which of the two lecturers I prefer to hear at that point in time, which will determine which *eiruv* is in effect.


###### Yoma 56b:4
[Yoma 56b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:4)

אֶלָּא: אִם בָּא חָכָם לַמִּזְרָח — עֵירוּבוֹ לַמִּזְרָח. לַמַּעֲרָב — עֵירוּבוֹ לַמַּעֲרָב. אֲבָל לְכָאן וּלְכָאן — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** he may say that **if the Sage comes to the east, his *eiruv* is to the east,** and if the Sage comes **to the west, his *eiruv* is to the west. However,** he may **not** say that if one Sage comes **from here, and** another Sage comes **from there,** he will go wherever he wishes, in either direction.


###### Yoma 56b:5
[Yoma 56b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:5)

וְהָוֵינַן בַּהּ: מַאי שְׁנָא לְכָאן וּלְכָאן דְּלָא, דְּאֵין בְּרֵירָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And we discussed** this passage in the Gemara and asked: **What is different** about a case in which one stipulated that if Sages came **from here and from there** that he may go to whichever side he chooses, such that his *eiruv* is **not** effective? Apparently, Rabbi Yehuda maintains **that there is no** retroactive **clarification,** i.e., this person cannot claim after the fact that the place where he walked is designated as the place that he initially intended for his *eiruv*.


###### Yoma 56b:6
[Yoma 56b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:6)

לְמִזְרָח וּמַעֲרָב נָמֵי אֵין בְּרֵירָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, according to this principle, when an individual establishes an *eiruv* **to the east and** to **the west** for the anticipated arrival of a single Sage, one should **also** invoke the principle that **there is no** retroactive **clarification.** Why does Rabbi Yehuda agree that if one anticipates the arrival of a single Sage and stipulates that if he comes to the east his *eiruv* will be to the east, the *eiruv* is valid?


###### Yoma 56b:7
[Yoma 56b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:7)

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּשֶׁכְּבָר בָּא חָכָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** This is not a true case of retroactive clarification, **as the Sage had already come** by twilight, but the one who established the *eiruv* did not yet know at which side of the town the Sage had arrived. Therefore, at the time the *eiruv* establishes his Shabbat residence, it is clear which *eiruv* he wants, although he himself will become aware of that only later. In this case, Rabbi Yehuda agrees that the *eiruv* is valid, but he nonetheless maintains in general that there is no retroactive clarification. This accounts for Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion that there was no container for nests of obligatory sin-offerings and burnt-offerings, as he maintains that there is no solution for the possible mixture of the different coins.


###### Yoma 56b:8
[Yoma 56b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:8)

וְהַשְׁתָּא דְּאָמְרִינַן לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אֵין בְּרֵירָה, הָא כְּתִיבָה אִית לֵיהּ! יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים נָמֵי, נַעֲבֵיד תְּרֵי וְנִכְתּוֹב עֲלַיְיהוּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And now that we have said** and proven that **according to Rabbi Yehuda there is no** retroactive **clarification,** nevertheless **he is of** the opinion that one may rely on **writing,** as proven from the *halakha* of the collection horns. If so, on **Yom Kippur as well, let us place two** pedestals **and write on them** which one is for the blood of the bull and which is for the blood of the goat.


###### Yoma 56b:9
[Yoma 56b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:9)

מִשּׁוּם חוּלְשָׁא דְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל לָאו אַדַּעְתֵּיהּ. דְּאִי לָא תֵּימָא הָכִי, בְּלָא כְּתִיבָה נָמֵי, הַאי נְפִישׁ וְהַאי זוּטַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The reason they did not place two pedestals with writing on them is **due to the High Priest’s weakness.** Since he is fasting during the entire day’s service, the writing will **not** be **on his mind;** he will pay no attention to it and might become confused. **As, if you do not say so,** that there is concern for the High Priest’s weakness, even **without writing** he should **also** not err, as **this** bowl in which he collects the bull’s blood **is** relatively **large and this** one for the goat’s blood **is small.**


###### Yoma 56b:10
[Yoma 56b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:10)

וְכִי תֵּימָא לָא מְקַבֵּיל לֵיהּ כּוּלֵּיהּ, וְהָאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: הַשּׁוֹחֵט צָרִיךְ שֶׁיְּקַבֵּל אֶת כׇּל דָּמוֹ שֶׁל פַּר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאֵת כׇּל דַּם הַפָּר יִשְׁפּוֹךְ אֶל יְסוֹד הַמִּזְבֵּחַ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say** that **he does not collect all** the bull’s blood but only some of it, so that the bowls are of equal size, **didn’t Rav Yehuda say: One who slaughters** the bull **must receive all of the blood of** the **bull, as it is stated: “And all the blood of the bull he shall pour out on the base of the altar”** (Leviticus 4:7).


###### Yoma 56b:11
[Yoma 56b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:11)

וְכִי תֵּימָא: דִּילְמָא מִשְׁתְּפִיךְ מִינֵּיהּ — הַאי חִיוָּר וְהַאי סוּמָּק. אֶלָּא, מִשּׁוּם חוּלְשָׁא דְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל לָאו אַדַּעְתֵּיהּ. הָכָא נָמֵי, מִשּׁוּם חוּלְשָׁא דְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל לָאו אַדַּעְתֵּיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say** that **perhaps some of** the bull’s blood **might spill,** yielding equal amounts of blood, there should still be no mistake, as **this** blood, that of the goat, is **white** and bright compared to the blood of the bull, **and this** blood of the bull **is red** and darker than the other. **Rather,** the reason must be that **due to the High Priest’s weakness,** these differences will **not** be **on his mind. Here, too,** the writing will not help, as **due to the High Priest’s weakness** the inscriptions will **not** be **on his mind.**


###### Yoma 56b:12
[Yoma 56b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:12)

הָהוּא דִּנְחֵית קַמֵּיהּ דְּרָבָא, אֲמַר: יָצָא וְהִנִּיחוֹ עַל כַּן שֵׁנִי שֶׁבַּהֵיכָל, נָטַל דַּם הַפָּר, וְהִנִּיחַ דַּם הַשָּׂעִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara relates: **A certain person descended** to lead the prayer service on Yom Kippur **before Rava**. He included the order of the High Priest’s Yom Kippur service in his prayer, and **he recited:** The High Priest then **emerged** from the Holy of Holies **and placed** the bowl **on the second golden pedestal in the Sanctuary; he took the blood of the bull** from the pedestal **and placed the blood of the goat** in its place.


###### Yoma 56b:13
[Yoma 56b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: חֲדָא כְּרַבָּנַן וַחֲדָא כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה?! אֵימָא: הִנִּיחַ דַּם הַשָּׂעִיר, וְנָטַל דַּם הַפָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava **said to him:** This is problematic, as **one** statement is **in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis, and** the other **one** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda.** According to the Rabbis, each of these bowls sat on its own pedestal in the Sanctuary, whereas Rabbi Yehuda maintains that the High Priest must first lift up the container with the blood of the bull and then put down that of the goat. **Rather,** you should **recite** the entire order of the service entirely in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis: **He placed the blood of the goat** on its designated pedestal **and took the blood of the bull** from the second stand.


###### Yoma 56b:14
[Yoma 56b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:14)

וְהִזָּה מִמֶּנּוּ עַל הַפָּרוֹכֶת כְּנֶגֶד אָרוֹן מִבַּחוּץ. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְכֵן יַעֲשֶׂה לְאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד״, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמַּזֶּה לִפְנַי לְפָנִים — כָּךְ מַזֶּה בַּהֵיכָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught: **And** the High Priest **sprinkled from** the blood of the bull **on the curtain opposite the Ark from outside** the Holy of Holies. **The Sages taught:** “And he shall make atonement for the sacred place because of the impurities of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, even all their sins; **and so shall he do for the Tent of Meeting** that dwells with them in the midst of their impurity” (Leviticus 16:16). **What** is the meaning when **the verse states** this? **Just as he sprinkles in the innermost sanctum,** the Holy of Holies, **so he sprinkles in the Sanctuary,** the Tent of Meeting, toward the curtain.


###### Yoma 56b:15
[Yoma 56b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:15)

מָה לִפְנַי לִפְנִים, אַחַת לְמַעְלָה וְשֶׁבַע לְמַטָּה מִדַּם הַפָּר — כָּךְ מַזֶּה בַּהֵיכָל. וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁלִּפְנַי לִפְנִים, אַחַת לְמַעְלָה וְשֶׁבַע לְמַטָּה מִדַּם הַשָּׂעִיר — כָּךְ מַזֶּה בַּהֵיכָל. ״הַשּׁוֹכֵן אִתָּם בְּתוֹךְ טוּמְאֹתָם״, אֲפִילּוּ בִּשְׁעַת שֶׁהֵן טְמֵאִים — שְׁכִינָה עִמָּהֶם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore: **Just as** in **the innermost sanctum** he sprinkles **once upward and seven** times **downward from the blood of the bull, so he sprinkles in the Sanctuary. And just as** in **the innermost sanctum** he sprinkles **once upward and seven** times **downward from the blood of the goat, so he sprinkles in the Sanctuary.** The last part of the verse: **“That dwells with them in the midst of their impurity,”** teaches that **even when** the Jewish people **are impure, the Divine Presence is with them.**


###### Yoma 56b:16
[Yoma 56b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yoma/r/56b:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ הָהוּא צַדּוּקִי לְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to this verse, the Gemara relates: **A certain Sadducee said to Rabbi Ḥanina:**