MISHNAH: Seven days before the Day of Atonement one isolates the High Priest from his house¹ to the Parhedrin² lodge and one prepares another Cohen because he might become disqualified³. Rebbi Jehudah says, one also prepares for him another wife, since maybe his wife would die, for it is said, he shall atone for himself and his house⁴ 16:6., his house means his wife. The Sages said to him, in this case the procedure never ends⁵.

footnotes: ¹ Meaning his wife, as explained later in the Mishnah. To prevent him from becoming impure should the wife become impure by menstruation. ² In the Halakhah the name also appears as פלהדרין with change of liquids. Possibly derived from πάρεδρος, ὁ, “adjunct”; cf. Note 113. ³ Since the entire Temple service of the Day of Atonement has to be performed by the High Priest himself, there must be somebody trained to act as High Priest in case the officiating one becomes somehow impure and unable to continue. ⁴ Lev. ⁵ Since the substitute wife also could die, one would need an unlimited supply of wives, but the High Priest is biblically restricted to one wife. Disqualification can be foreseen, death cannot be foreseen.

HALAKHAH: “Seven days before the Day of Atonement,” etc. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan understood if⁶ 37; differently Babli 2a. from the following: As he did on that day⁷ 8:34, referring to the dedication of the Tabernacle, where Aaron and his sons spent seven full days, day and night, at the Tabernacle, far from their families., these are the seven days of initiation. Did the Eternal command for future generations⁸. To make, this is the goat of the Day of Atonement⁹ 16:15 for the blood of the goat sacrificed on the Day of Atonement. The same verb also is used in 9:7 with reference to the goat sacrificed on the eighth day of dedication which happened to be the first of the first month.. Or maybe it is the goat of a New Moon? Rebbi Abba said, to atone for you, an atonement which is like the other. Since the one¹⁰ is atonement of Aaron himself and his sons themselves, the other also must be atonement of Aaron himself and his sons themselves

footnotes: ⁶ That the separation of the High Priest from his wife for seven days has some biblical justification. A much shorter version covering both interpretations given here is in Sifra Ṣaw, Mekhilta de Milluim ⁷ Lev. ⁸ Since the Chapter starts with God’s commandment to inaugurate the Tabernacle, the mention here of God’s commandment is redundant and may be interpreted as a new commandment for future generations. ⁹ The verb עשׂה is used in Lev. ¹⁰ The dedication ceremony, where Aaron had to bring an atoning sacrifice separate from that for his sons and the people, the other is the Day of Atonement where the same is true.

Rebbi Jonah in the name of Bar Qappara understood it from the following. As he did on that day, these are the seven days of initiation. Did the Eternal command, this is burning of the Cow¹¹ 3:1).. It is said here, did the Eternal command, and it is said there¹² 19:2., this is the low of the Torah which the Eternal commanded, saying.” To make, this is the goat of the Day of Atonement¹⁰. Or maybe it is the goat of a New Moon? As Rebbi Abba said, to atone for you, an atonement which is like the other. Since the one is atonement valid only through the High Priest, the other also¹³ 16 refer exclusively to actions by the High Priest. Babli 3b. is atonement through the High Priest.

footnotes: ¹¹ The priest in charge of burning the Red Cow to produce the ashes which cleanse from the impurity of the dead also had to be separated for seven days (Mishnah Parah ¹² Num. ¹⁰ The dedication ceremony, where Aaron had to bring an atoning sacrifice separate from that for his sons and the people, the other is the Day of Atonement where the same is true. ¹³ The ceremonies of the Day of Atonement detailed in Lev.

What is the difference between the Cohen who burns the Cow and the High Priest on the Day of Atonement? The separation of the first is for purity and his brothers the priests refrain from touching him. The separation of the other is for holiness and his brothers the priests touch him. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan, who infers¹⁴ from that verse, [it is exceptional for the Cow, it is an embellishment for the Cow¹⁵ 3:1., one understands it. In the opinion of Bar Qappara who does not infer¹⁶ it from this verse], why does one touch here but not touch there? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, that his brothers the priests should not make him impure. [But will he not be impure because of his sprinkling¹⁷ 129). But this impurity is minor, it can be removed by immersion in a miqweh and the following sundown. It is obvious that no sprinkling can be done on the day of the burning. In fact, a Pharisee Cohen burning the Cow is made impure and has to cleanse himself in a miqweh on the day of the ceremony because of a quarrel with Sadducees, Mishnah Parah 3:7.?] Rebbi Abun said, even Bar Qappara holds that it is exceptional for the Cow, it is an embellishment for the Cow¹⁸.

footnotes: ¹⁴ Based on the preceding text, one has to read “does not infer” since in the explanation attributed to R. Joḥanan, burning of the Cow is not mentioned. (In the Babli 2a, an argument close to that of Bar Qappara here is attributed to R. Joḥanan, but this should be irrelevant for the study of the Yerushalmi.) ¹⁵ The separation of the priest who will burn the Cow is purely rabbinical; Tosephta Parah ¹⁶ Here one has to read: “who infers.” ¹⁷ Since it is to be presumed that the Cohen selected to burn the Cow was pure, water with ashes from prior Cows will make him impure (Sifry Num. ¹⁸ Everybody agrees that the rules for the Cohen burning the Cow are purely rabbinical, not accepted by Sadducees, and bar Qappara’s mention of the burning of the Cow is a far-fetched simile, not an authoritative interpretation of the verse.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan¹⁹: But since the he-goat of initiation obstructs, does the he-goat of the Day of Atonement also obstruct²⁰ 9:2) is one unit; there could be no bull without a he-goat. But in Mishnah Menaḥot 4:2 it is stated that for all holiday sacrifices bulls and he-goats are independent of one another. If the rules of the Day of Atonement are derived from the rules of the initiation rites, the Mishnah would have to state an exception for the Day of Atonement.? And he accepted it from him²¹. [On that Rebbi Mana said, I am wondering how could Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish ask before Rebbi Joḥanan and he accepted it from him?] Should he not have objected to him that we do not find that anything obstructing can be inferred from anything not obstructing, nor can anything not obstructing be inferred from anything obstructing? “He breaks the neck”, “to burn in smoke”²² 1:15), in the same verse it is required that the Cohen break the neck of the bird and burn it in smoke on the altar.. Since (breaking the neck)²³ is done on top of the altar, so (breaking the neck) [burning in smoke]²⁴ I Parshata 7(4). is done on the top of the altar. Breaking the neck obstructs, burning in smoke does not obstruct²⁵. “Permanently,” [“permanently].” “Permanently” is mentioned for the pan-baked breads²⁶ 6:12–16), a tenth of an epha of fine flour baked into “breads” (v. 14) without a specified number. “Permanent” is stated in v. 13. and “permanently” is mentioned for the shew-bread²⁷ 24:5. The arrangement is called “permanent” in v. 24:8..] The shew-breads are obstructive, the pan-baked breads are not obstructive. Since [“permanently” mentioned for the pan-baked breads refers to twelve,] so “permanently” mentioned [for the shew-bread refers to twelve²⁸ 6:5, but a deviation from this number invalidates only shew-bread, not the High Priest’s offering.. “Taking”, “taking”. “Taking” mentioned in Egypt²⁹ 12:22, the commandment to take “a bundle of hyssop”., “taking” is mentioned for lulav³⁰ 23;40, the commandment to take 4 kinds of plants; it is not mentioned that they must be tied as a bundle.. [Since “taking” mentioned in Egypt implies a bundle³¹ 11b, and Sifra Emor Pereq 16(1), this is rejected as R. Jehudah’s minority opinion., so also “taking” mentioned for lulav implies a bundle³².] For the lulav it obstructs, in Egypt it did not obstruct. Therefore we found things obstructing can be inferred from anything not obstructing, and things not obstructing can be inferred from anything obstructing³⁴.

footnotes: ¹⁹ Babli 3b. ²⁰ In the ceremonies for the eighth day of initiation, the commandment to Aaron to take a bull and a he-goat (Lev. ²¹ The rules of the Day of Atonement cannot be derived from the rules of the initiation rites. ²² In the rules of the elevation offering of a bird (Lev. ²³ This must read: “burning in smoke”. ²⁴ The text in parentheses was first written by the scribe, the text in brackets is the correction. The original text in parentheses is the correct one. Sifra Wayyiqra ²⁵ If the sacrifice would become impure and disqualified after the breaking of the neck but before the burning, the offerer has fulfilled his vow and it is not necessary to bring a second sacrifice. ²⁶ Therefore one part of R. Mana’s objection has been shown to be invalid.The daily offering of the High Priest (Lev. ²⁷ The shew-bread is specified as 12 loaves, Lev. ²⁸ It is obvious that here also one has to switch the places of “shew-bread” and “panbaked breads”. The number of breads of the High Priest is fixed as 12 in Mishnah Menaḥot ²⁹ Ex. ³⁰ Lev. ³¹ In the Babli Sukkah ³² Both of R. Mana’s objections were disregarded by Tannaim; R. Simeon ben Laqish is justified. ³⁴ Babli 4a.

Since Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish has this objection, from where does Rebbi Simeon derive it³³? Following that of Rebbi Ismael:³⁴ With this Aaron shall come into the Sanctuary³⁵ 16:3., what was said in the matter³⁶. One separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Also in this case one separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Is that spelled out in the matter? But since the death of Aaron’s sons is mentioned in the matter³⁷ 16:1. and they died during the initiation, it is as if the matter was mentioned. Does not in the end Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish understand it from the same verse³⁸? But he is like a person who hears a statement and questions it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is: the glory of the Eternal was dwelling on Mount Sinai³⁹ 24:16.. Just as Moses did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was sanctified in the cloud all of seven days, so Aaron did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was inducted by the anointing oil all of seven days⁴⁰.

footnotes: ³³ The rule that the High Priest is separated from his family for seven days before the Day of Atonement. ³⁴ Babli 4a. ³⁵ Lev. ³⁶ Of Aaron’s induction into the High Priesthood. ³⁷ Lev. ³⁸ He still has to explain the same verse used by R. Joḥanan and Bar Qappara, which he himself proved to be inadequate. ³⁹ Ex. ⁴⁰ It is not a biblical requirement but popular usage supported by an aggadic argument.

In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, why is the death of Aaron’s sons mentioned in the matter when they died during initiation? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, Aaron’s sons died on the First of Nisan; why does He mention their death at the Day of Atonement⁴¹ 16:1.? To teach you that just as the Day of Atonement atones for Israel, so the death of the Just atones for Israel. Rebbi Ba bar Binah said, why did the verse append the death of Miriam to the Chapter of the Cow⁴² 19; the death of Miriam is noted in v. 20:1.? To teach you that just as the ashes of the Cow atone for Israel, so the death of the Just atones for Israel. Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said, why did the verse append the death of Aaron to the breaking of the Tablets⁴³9:7–29; Aaron’s death is mentioned in 10:6 in a verse which requires further explanation, given in the next paragraph without reference to the Day of Atonement. Lev. rabba 20, end.? To teach you that the death of the Just is as hard for the Holy One, praise to Him, as the breaking of the Tablets.

footnotes: ⁴¹ Lev. ⁴² The rules of the Red Cow and purification from the impurity of the dead are given in Num. ⁴³ The breaking of the Tablets and the story of the Golden Calf are quoted in Deut.

⁴⁴ of Yalqut Shimˋony reproduced by L. Ginsberg in his Yerushalmi Fragments from the Genizah, pp. 311–313, referred to by Q. A short parallel is in the Babli, Roš Haššanah 3a; parallels are in Mekhilta dR. Ismael Bešallaḥ, Masekhta de Wayassa 1; Tanḥuma Ḥuqqat 18. The entire paragraph is discussed by Rashi in his Commentary to Num. 26:13. It is written⁴⁵ 10:6. According to Num., he did not die at Mosera and never was buried. In the text, the word [אל] has been added from the masoretic text and Q.: and the Children of Israel travelled from the wells of Bene Yaaqon to Mosera; there Aaron died. Did Aaron die at Mosera? Did he not die on Mount Hor? This is what is written⁴⁶ 33:38., Aaron the Priest ascended**Mount Hor by the order of the Eternal and died there. But when Aaron died, the clouds of glory⁴⁷ disappeared and the Canaanites wanted to attack them. This is what is written⁴⁸21:1., the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who was dwelling in the Negev, heard that Israel came in the way of Atarim, and made war against Israel. What means “in the way of Atarim”? That the great scout had died who had scouted the way for them. They came and attacked them. Then Israel wanted to return to Egypt and returned eight travel stations⁴⁹ 33.. The tribe of Levi ran after them and killed from them eight families⁵⁰. Also they killed from them four families, ⁵¹ 26:23. (See Rashi, quoted in Note 44).for the Amramite, the Yisharite, the Ḥevronite, the Uzzielite. When did they recover? In the days of David. This is what is written⁵² 72:6., in his days the just may bloom, immense peace, without moon-periods. They said, what caused us all this bloodshed? They said, because we did not show compassion for this perfect person⁵³. They sat down, organized his eulogies, and showed compassion for this Just; then the Omnipresent credited them as if he had died there, was buried there, and they showed compassion for the perfect person.

footnotes: ⁴⁴ For this Aggada and more aggadic parts in this Tractate there exists a Medieval copy in the Qonteros Aḥaron ⁴⁵ Deut. ⁴⁶ Num. ⁴⁷ Who had covered the Israelites’ camp from the moment of the Exodus. ⁴⁸ Num. ⁴⁹ As enumerated in Num. ⁵⁰ In Q: “16 families”. ⁵¹ A redundant verse in 1Chr. ⁵² Ps. ⁵³ To organize due eulogies. In this context, גְּמִילוּת חֶסֶד means services to the living or the dead by a person himself, which cannot be bought by money.

Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the tenth of an ephah and breeches obstruct⁵⁴ 6:13) as well as the breeches which are part of the priests’ holy garments (Ex. 28:42–43), even though they are mentioned neither in the instructions for the initiation rites given to Moses (Ex. 28) nor in the record of the execution of these instructions (Lev. 8), are necessary and the omission of the offering or failure to wear the breeches would have invalidated the entire proceedings. Babli 5b.. What is the reason? Both are “making”⁵⁵6:14, for the high priest in Lev. 6:15, and Moses is ordered to “make breeches” for the priests in Ex. 28:42.. Rebbi Ḥanina said, and do with Aaron and his sons so⁵⁶ 29:35. The verse continues, all that I commanded you.**, all which is written in the Chapter obstructs. This comes following what Rebbi Samuel bar Nahman said in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: this is the word⁵⁷ 8:5, the declaration of Moses to the people explaining the initiation rites., and this is the word⁵⁸ 29:1, the instruction for future initiation rites., even reading the Chapter obstructs. Rebbi Joḥanan said, anything obstructing for future generations obstructs here, [and anything not obstructing for future generations does not obstruct here.] What do you have? The leaning of hands⁵⁹ 29:10,15,19) which for the initiation rites is an essential act but in the rules of sacrifices (Lev. 1–5) is prescribed only for private offerings, and in no case would the failure to follow the requirement disqualify the sacrifice. and the remainders of the blood⁶⁰ which are not obstructing in future generations are obstructing here. Rebbi Ḥanina said, the diadem and Aaron’s mitre precede the sons’ belts⁶¹. Jehudah the great says, you shall gird them with belts, Aaron and his sons⁶² 29:9, the commandment to Moses.. Rebbi Idi said, what you are saying is as a meritorious deed. But as a commandment, Moses brought near Aaron and his sons and washed them in water, and after that, he put the vest on him, and after that, Moses brought Aaron and his sons near and clothed them with shirts⁶³ 8:6,7,13, description of the execution..

footnotes: ⁵⁴ The presentation of twelve breads which is the daily offering of the High Priest (Note 26) and the initiation of offering of a common priest (Lev. ⁵⁵ It is held that every commandment using the verb עשה requires strict adherence to the rules given by this verb. The verb is used for the initiation of a priest in Lev. ⁵⁶ Ex. ⁵⁷ Lev. ⁵⁸ Ex. ⁵⁹ The leaning of hands of Aaron and his sons on the heads of the sacrificial animals (Ex. ⁶⁰ The remainder of the blood collected by the Cohen after the required sprinkling of blood on the altar walls has to be poured into the base of the altar. But this act is not required for validity of the sacrifice; if the blood becomes impure after the sprinkling, the blood has to be otherwise disposed of but the sacrifice is unquestionably valid. These cases represent the points of difference between R. Ḥanina and R. Joḥanan. Babli 4b (bottom), switching attributions. ⁶¹ In dressing of the priests in initiation. ⁶² Ex. ⁶³ Lev.

Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose⁶⁴ not stated, and R. Tanḥum objected that his assertion already was a tannaitic statement, he must be an otherwise unknown Amora. Since Aaron entered the High Priesthood only on the eighth day, Moses must have acted as High Priest during the first seven. Babli Avodah zarah 34a as tannaitic statement. said, it is clear to us that Moses officiated in the High Priesthood in a white robe. Rebbi Tanḥum bar Yudan said, it was stated: ⁶⁵ 14.“All seven days of initiation did Moses officiate in the High Priesthood but the Divine Presence was not drawn through him. When Aaron dressed in the priestly garments and officiated, the Divine Presence was drawn through him.” What is the reason? *For today the Eternal will appear to you.*⁶⁶ 9:4.

footnotes: ⁶⁴ The only talmudic Sage known of this name is the Tanna, son of R. Yose ben Ḥalaphta. But since he said, ⁶⁵ Sifra Šemini Milluim ⁶⁶ Lev.

Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina asked, how was the tenth of an epha brought? Was it brought half or [brought] whole⁶⁷? Since it is written⁶⁸ 9:23., Moses and Aaron came to the Tent of Meeting, this teaches that he only came with him to teach him the work of incense. [This implies that] half it was brought. If you are saying that it was brought whole, one should have stated, about he work of incense and the tenth of an epha. Rebbi Tanḥum bar Yudan said, are we not concerned with service inside? He already had taught him about service outside⁶⁹.

footnotes: ⁶⁷ Since the offering of the High Priest had to be brought half in the morning and half in the evening, but in the morning of the eighth day Aaron was not yet High Priest, the question is whether only the afternoon offering was made or the morning offering later in the morning. ⁶⁸ Lev. ⁶⁹ The breads of the High Priest are burned on the outside altar; no service in the Tent is involved and the prior argument does not prove anything.

What were the initiation sacrifices? Private sacrifice or public sacrifice? Since it is written⁷⁰ 8:18., Aaron and his sons leaned with their hands on the he-goat’s head, it follows that it was private sacrifice⁷¹. But it was stated, public sacrifice⁷² 13.. Rebbi Idi said, the community volunteered and handed them over to them. From where was initiation deduced⁷³ 8:35) that Aaron and his sons have to sit at the gate of the Tabernacle “seven days, day and night” All sacrifices which are eaten “one day and one night” may be eaten during the day of the sacrifice and the following night.? From sacrifices or from Creation? If you are saying from sacrifices, the night follows the day. If you are saying from Creation, the day follows the night. If you are saying from sacrifices, the last night has no day⁷⁴. If you are saying from Creation, the first day has no night.

footnotes: ⁷⁰ Lev. ⁷¹ Since public sacrifices never need leaning on the sacrificial animal. ⁷² Sifra Ṣaw Mekhilta deMilluim ⁷³ Since it is written (Lev. ⁷⁴ Since on the eighth day they were permitted to leave the Sanctuary after the completion of services.

⁷⁵ There, we have stated⁷⁶ 11:7, describing the order in which the shew-bread was removed from the table in the Tent of Meeting on the Sabbath and new bread deposited when the verse prescribes that the shew-bread always be on the table.: “These take away and those put down. And the hand of one is close to the hand of the other, for it is said⁷⁷ 25:30., before Me always.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s⁷⁸. But according to Rebbi Joḥanan does Rebbi Meïr agree that if they removed the old set in the morning and arranged the new set in the evening this is also “always”⁷⁹. “Rebbi Yose says, also these may remove and those put down; for this also is ‘always’.⁷⁶ 11:7, describing the order in which the shew-bread was removed from the table in the Tent of Meeting on the Sabbath and new bread deposited when the verse prescribes that the shew-bread always be on the table.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Yose inferred this from the sitting of Aaron and his sons⁸⁰. As you are saying, at the sitting of Aaron and his sons it was necessary that the day deliver to the night and the night deliver to the day⁸¹, so here it was necessary that the day deliver to the night and the night deliver to the day. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Yose said, it was sufficient that the day deliver to the night⁸². What does Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph say about the sitting of Aaron and his sons?, Since if there, where it is written “always”, you are saying that it was sufficient that the day deliver to the night, here⁸³ where it is not written “always” not so much more? You have to say that in Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion there were seven erections and six dismantlings⁸⁴. In Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph’s opinion here were fourteen erections and thirteen dismantlings⁸⁵ 8:34 requires that Aaron and his sons not leave the sacred domain during 7 days, but v. 35 states that they have to sit there “day and night”, it follows that they could not leave, and therefore the Tent could not be disassembled, during the days, but it could be disassembled in the night after nightfall, then re-erected for the night, and disassembled after dawn.. It was stated⁸⁶ 36; Num. rabba 12(18); Seder Olam Chapter 7.: “All seven days of initiation did Moses anoint the Tabernacle, erected and dismantled it, and performed in it the services⁸⁷. On the eighth day, he erected it and did not dismantle. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah said, on the eighth day also he erected, anointed, and dismantled.” Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that erection in the night is invalid for service during the day⁸⁸ 12(18).. You have to say that in Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion following Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah there were fourteen erections and thirteen dismantlings. In Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph’s opinion following Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah there were 21 erections and 20 dismantlings⁸⁹ 12(18)..

footnotes: ⁷⁵ One discusses what it means that Aaron and his sons had to sit at the gate of the Tent of Meeting “seven days, day and night”. ⁷⁶ Mishnah Menaḥot ⁷⁷ Ex. ⁷⁸ Since it is anonymous. ⁷⁹ So even according to R. Meïr the arrangement that the twelve shew-breads were exchanged in a ceremony involving 24 priests so that the table should not be empty for one moment is recommended but not absolutely necessary. ⁷⁶ Mishnah Menaḥot ⁸⁰ Since it is understood that if there is no Tent of Meeting, Aaron and his sons could not sit at its gate and, as explained in the following paragraph, the Tent was every day (or also every night) disassembled and reerected, the requirement that they sit there “seven days, day and night” could only mean that every day and every night they were sitting there for some time. ⁸¹ They actually had to be present there only at dusk and dawn. ⁸² His statement refers to the shew-breads. He reads “always” to mean that there shall be no day on which the table be empty. Since the breads were kept there from Sabbath to Sabbath, he only requires that the new breads be delivered before dusk at the end of the Sabbath. ⁸³ At the initiation of the priests. ⁸⁴ Since it is shown in the next paragraph that every morning the Tent had to be re-erected, and Aaron and his sons were to be present in the sacred precinct day and night, the Tent was erected on day 1, and on days 2–7 was disassembled and re-erected every morning after dawn. ⁸⁵ Since Lev. ⁸⁶ Sifra Ṣaw Mekhilta deMilluim ⁸⁷ Since Aaron and his sons entered service only on day 8, for the first 7 days Moses acted as High Priest (Note 64). ⁸⁸ Since it was necessary to disassemble the Tent after the seventh night, it follows that services could be held only in presence of a Tent erected during daytime. Num. rabba ⁸⁹ Since for R. Joḥanan the Tent has to be standing every dawn and dusk (except for the first dawn) and R. Yose ben R. Jehudah requires (in the interpretation of R. Zeˋira) that the Tent be re-erected in the night but not for service, in 7 days and 7 nights there must be 14 erections and one less dismantling.According to R. Ḥiyya ben Joseph the tent was erected every morning for services, disassembled and re-erected for dusk, and disassembled and re-erected for the night. In this opinion it makes no difference whether the Tent was disassembled before or after dawn. There are different name attributions in Num. rabba

From where the dismantlings? Rebbi Zeˋira said,⁹⁰ 7:1. Since on this day the princes of the tribes started presenting their sacrifices, it must be the day when Aaron and his sons already officiated, the eighth day of initiation. Since the Tent of Meeting already was erected on the first day, finishing the erections on the eighth implies some dismantling in between. it was on the day that Moses stopped erecting the Dwelling, on the day the erections stopped. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, as he did on that day, did the Eternal command⁹¹ 8:34. Since the verse implies that all of seven days the ritual commanded in Ex. 29 had to be repeated, including the erection of the Tent of Meeting.. Was this not already stated? One in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan ⁹², and one in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish.

footnotes: ⁹⁰ Num. ⁹¹ Lev. ⁹² He interprets the verse differently, Note 7.

On the Eighth {Day}. There are Tannaim who state, it⁹³ was anointed; and there are Tannaim who state, it was not anointed. There are Tannaim who state, it was dismantled; and there are Tannaim who state, it was not dismantled. Rebbi Ḥanin said, it is obvious for us that for him who said, it was anointed it was dismantled; and for him who said, it was not anointed it was not dismantled. Him who said, it was anointed, one understands since it is written he anointed them⁹⁰ 7:1. Since on this day the princes of the tribes started presenting their sacrifices, it must be the day when Aaron and his sons already officiated, the eighth day of initiation. Since the Tent of Meeting already was erected on the first day, finishing the erections on the eighth implies some dismantling in between.. But he who said, it was not anointed, how does he uphold he anointed them? I consider it as if it were missing anointment and you anointed it. Him who said, it was anointed, one understands since it is written⁹⁴ 29:37. If the altar was not put out of commission in the meantime because the Tent was dismantled, only one atonement would have been necessary. Therefore every day must have seen a new commissioning of the altar., seven days they shall atone the altar. But he who said, it was not dismantled, how does he uphold seven days they shall atone the altari Atonement by blood, as it was stated⁹⁵: On both of them they were sprinkling from all purifications⁹⁶ that were there, so that the water should penetrate under the blood, the words of Rebbi Jehudah; Rebbi Yose says, under the blood and under the anointing oil.

footnotes: ⁹³ The Tent of Meeting. ⁹⁰ Num. ⁹⁴ Ex. ⁹⁵ Babli 4a. The persons referred to are the High Priest for the service of the Day of Atonement and the priest chosen to burn the corpse of the Red Cow. The sprinkling water has to penetrate the prietly garments below the blood and oil by which they were dedicated. ⁹⁶ Ashes from all Red Cows conserved in the Temple.

Ben Bathyra explained⁹⁹: Perhaps he would sleep with his menstruating wife and be pushed away all of seven days¹⁰⁰ 15:24.. But are Israel suspected about menstruating women¹⁰¹ 4:1 Note 3 (SJ 34).? Following what was stated there¹⁰² 2:5, Notes 80,81.: “If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure, if he separates immediately he is liable, for his separation is as pleasurable to him as his entry¹⁰³ and becomes totally pure at the next sundown. But if he separates while still with erection, he had intercourse with a menstruating woman and is severely impure for seven days. Ben Bathyra’s argument presupposes that the High Priest is an ignoramus..” You have to say that he who transmits the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan needs that of Ben Bathyra, and he who transmits the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan needs that of Ben Bathyra. If Rebbi Joḥanan had said but not Ben Bathyra, we would have said that he may have sex but sleep in the Palhedrin lodge; therefore one needs that of Ben Bathyra. If Ben Bathyra had said but not Rebbi Joḥanan , we would have said, let him not have sex but he may sleep in his house; therefore one needs that of Rebbi Joḥanan , and one needs that of Ben Bathyra.

footnotes: ⁹⁹ One returns to the discussion of Mishnah 1, explaining why the High Priest has to live in the Temple precinct for seven days prior to the Day of Atonement. Babli 6a, Tosephta 1:1. ¹⁰⁰ Lev. ¹⁰¹ Is not Ben Bathyra’s explanation an insult to the High Priest? If this Ben Bathyra is the early Tanna (and not the later R. Jehudah ben Bathyra to whom the statement is attributed in the Babli), his argument might be an anti-Sadducee statement, since Sadducees and Pharisees accused one another of sleeping with menstruating women by following their sectarian interpretation of the biblical law; cf. Niddah ¹⁰² Mishnah Ševuˋot ¹⁰³ If the wife becomes impure during intercourse, if then he stops moving immediately and separates after the erection has disappeared, he touched an impure woman, has to immerse himself in a miqweh,

“All lodges which were in the Temple were not liable for mezuzah except for the Palhedrin lodge which was the abode of the High Priest for seven days every year. Rebbi Jehudah said, also this is a decree which was decreed about it.” In your gates¹⁰⁵6:9.. There are Tannaim who state, to exclude the gates of the Temple Mount and the Courtyards¹⁰⁶ 36.. There are Tannaim who state, to include. He who said to exclude, Rebbi Jehudah. He who said to include, the rabbis. Rebbi Jehudah says it correctly; what is the rabbis’ reason? In your gates, are these lodgings? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun asked, but did we not state, in your gates, to include city gates¹⁰⁷? Are these lodgings? But through them one enters lodgings, so also here through them one enters lodgings.

footnotes: ¹⁰⁵ Deut. ¹⁰⁶ Babli 11b, Sifry Deut. ¹⁰⁷ Babli 11a.

¹⁰⁸ in Megillah 4:12 (ל). They have no direct connection with the topic treated here.Huldat hammulim¹⁰⁹ “entrances of cave dwellings” has no linguistic basis and would be superfluous. A possibility is Jastrow’s explanation, ‘loading and unloading dock for mules”, from מולא, Latin mulus, mula, the mule. is liable for mezuzah. A window, four by four {cubits} wide, in which slaves sit and make wind for their masters are liable for mezuzah. Coops one on top of the other are liable for mezuzah; one steps on the doorstep below¹¹⁰. Rebbi Yose was sorry not to have seen the coop of Rebbi Ilai which he had made according to all rabbis¹¹¹ according to everybody..

footnotes: ¹⁰⁸ These lines are copied from the discussion of the laws of mezuzah ¹⁰⁹ A direct translation would be “mole of circumcised”, which makes no sense. The explanation of Qorban haEda, ¹¹⁰ If the chicken coops are part of the house and are directly accessible from the doorstep, and the areas of the openings add up to four-by-four cubits. ¹¹¹ That it was required to have a mezuzah

“To the Palhedrin² lodge.” Abba Shaul was calling it the council member’s lodge¹¹². Earlier it was called the council member’s lodge. But now one calls it the Palhedrin lodge. The ex-priests¹¹³ 13, p. 16, as προϊεραθέντες, ex-priests, is the correct one., a passing¹¹⁴ matter. In the first {Temple}, where he, his son, and his grandson served, there were eighteen priests serving. But in the second, where they bought it for money, but some say that they killed one another by sorcery¹¹⁵, there served 80 priests, but some say 81, and some say 82, and some say 84, and some say 85. And from these Simeon the Just served for 40 years. Rebbi Aḥa said, it is written¹¹⁶ 10:27. Babli 9a., the fear of the Eternal adds days, these are the priests who served in the first Temple, but the years of the wicked ones will be shortened’, these are those who served in the second building. It happened that one sent through his son two measures of silver, full of silver, and their covers silver. Another came and sent through his son two measures of gold, full of gold, and their covers gold. They said, the foal overturned the candelabrum¹¹⁷ R. Levy said, it happened that a woman honored a judge with a silver candelabrum. Her opponent in the suit went and honored him with a golden foal. The next day the woman went and found the judgment against her. She said to him, My lord, may the judgment be radiant before you like the silver candelabrum. He said to her, what can I do? The foal overturned the candelabrum. The Yerushalmi text is quoted in Sifry Num. 131; Pesiqta dR. Cahana A hare Mot towards end, Lev. rabba 21(8)..

footnotes: ² In the Halakhah the name also appears as פלהדרין with change of liquids. Possibly derived from πάρεδρος, ὁ, “adjunct”; cf. Note 113. ¹¹² Greek βουλευταί, ὁι. Since under Persian rule the High Priest also was the political head of the commonwealth, it is reasonable to assume that during his stay at the lodge also the council meetings were held there. Babli 8b. ¹¹³ Allon’s explanation in Tarbiz ¹¹⁴ Reading עבירה for עבידה. The meaning of Palhedrin should be seen as pejorative. ¹¹⁵ Since in theory the appointment as High Priest is for life, later generations had difficulty to understand how the appointment to the High Priesthood could be on a yearly basis. They had to assume that the acting High Priest died within his year. ¹¹⁶ Pr. ¹¹⁷ This popular saying refers to another story, told in Pesiqta dR. Cahana, Ekha:

¹¹⁸ We find that the Temple was destroyed the first time only because they were active idolators, and uncoverers of nakedness¹¹⁹ 18.), and spillers of blood. And so the second time. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Torta said, we find that Shiloh was destroyed only because they slighted the holidays and desecrated the sancta. We find that the Temple was destroyed the first time only because they were active idolators, and uncoverers of nakedness, and spillers of blood. But of the second we know that they toiled in the Torah, were careful about the commandments and tithes, and every good custom¹²⁰ (E. G.). was in them; only they loved money and hated one another without reason. Hate without reason is hard for it is the equivalent if idolatry, and uncovering nakedness, and spilling of blood. An example. Rebbi Zeˋira, and Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, and Rebbi Abuna, were sitting and saying, it is worse since the first time it was rebuilt but the second time it was not rebuilt. Rebbi Zeˋira said, the first ones repented, the second ones did not repent. Rebbi Eleazar said, the first time their sin was brought into the open and so was their end; the second time their sin was brought into the open but their end was not brought into the open. They asked Rebbi Eliezer, are the later generations more qualified than the first? He told them, your witness, the Temple, shall prove it. Our forefathers removed the ceiling, the curtain of Jehudah was lifted¹²¹*,* but we blew out the walls, who are saying, make bare, make bare, up to its foundations¹²² 137:7.. They said, any generation in which it is not rebuilt is debited as if it had destroyed it.

footnotes: ¹¹⁸ Babli 9a/9b. ¹¹⁹ The technical term for incest and adultery (all crimes prohibited in Lev. ¹²⁰ Latin suetum ¹²¹ Is. 22:8. ¹²² Ps.

¹²³ 3:3, Notes 146–188 and Megillah1:12.“One arranges for another Cohen as his replacement, maybe a disqualification of his will happen.” How? Does one leave them alone together? Rebbi Haggai said, by Moses⁸! If one would leave them alone together, he would kill him! Him¹²⁴ 6:12; the offering of the High Priest starting with the day he is anointed for his office. Sifra Ṣaw Parašah 3(3). The singular indicates that only one High Priest can be appointed at one time. This implies that the reserve appointee for the day of Atonement cannot have the status of High Priest unless he actually is needed.. One anoints one, one does not anoint two. Rebbi Joḥanan said, because of rivalry¹²⁵.

footnotes: ¹²³ From here on there is a parallel in Horaiot ⁸ Since the Chapter starts with God’s commandment to inaugurate the Tabernacle, the mention here of God’s commandment is redundant and may be interpreted as a new commandment for future generations. ¹²⁴ Lev. ¹²⁵ He disagrees and holds that while the two could not have been anointed on the same day, they could have been anointed on different days. The rule that the back-up Cohen has lower status is practical, not biblical, as is the entire institution of the back-up.

If one was incapacitated and the other officiated. The first has all the sanctity of the High Priesthood on him; the second one is qualified neither as High Priest nor as common priest¹²⁶ 12b), “one increases in sanctity but never decreases” (cf. Bikkurim 3:3, Note 57; Megillah 1:12 72a 1. 47, Ševuot 1:8, 33b 1.13). Since the service of the Day of Atonement is valid only if performed by the High Priest, the substitute becomes a temporary High Priest. He cannot act as a High Priest if the actual High Priest’s temporary disability is removed, and he is permanently barred from acting as a common priest. As the Babli points out, if the High Priest dies, the substitute automatically becomes his successor. Tosephta 1:4.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he transgressed and officiated, his officiating is valid. Whose officiating? Let us hear from the following: It happened to Ben Illem from Sepphoris that the High Priest experienced an emission of semen on the Day of Atonement; Ben Illem entered and officiated in his stead. He went out and asked the king: “The bull and the he-goat which are brought today, are they offered from his or from the High Priest’s property?⁶ 37; differently Babli 2a.” The king understood what he was asking and answered him, “is it not enough for you that you served once before Him Who spoke and the world was created?” Ben Illem understood that he was removed from the High Priesthood.

footnotes: ¹²⁶ As the Babli explains (Yoma ⁶ That the separation of the High Priest from his wife for seven days has some biblical justification. A much shorter version covering both interpretations given here is in Sifra Ṣaw, Mekhilta de Milluim

¹²⁷ 20 (end), Tanḥuma Aḥare 7, Tanḥuma Buber Aḥare9 (Note 127), Num. rabba2*(end), Pesiqta dR. Cahana Aḥare* (ed. Buber Note 126), Avot deR. Natan A, Chap. 35 (ed. Schechter fol. 35a.) lt happened that Simeon ben Qimḥit went out to talk to (an Arab king) [the king on the eve of the Day of Atonement]¹²⁸ iv, pp. 805–806. Speculations about the background of this tradition are in H. Grätz, Geschichte der Juden 3/2, Note 19ii (4th. ed., pp. 738–739). and a drop of spittle squirted on his garment and defiled him. His brother Jehudah entered and officiated in his stead. On that day their mother saw two of her sons as High Priests. Qimḥit had seven sons; all of them served as High Priests. They sent and asked Qimḥit, what good deeds are in your hand? She told them, there should come over me if the beams of the roof of my house ever saw the hair on my head or the seam of my undershirt. They said, all flours are flour but Qimḥit’s flour is fine flour. They recited about her¹²⁹ 45:14.: All the honor of the king’s daughter is inside; gold settings her garments

footnotes: ¹²⁷ In addition to the two parallels there are short versions in the Babli 47a, Tosephta 3:20, Lev. rabba ¹²⁸ There can be little doubt that the scribe’s text is the correct one; the corrector’s text is an unjustified emendation. The question is discussed in detail by S. Liebermann, Tosefta kiFshutah ¹²⁹ Ps.

I could think that the Anointed for War¹³⁰ 20:1–15. should bring his tenth of an ephah¹³¹6:15.. The verse says¹³² 29:30. The only hereditary office in Divine Service is that of the High Priest. Babli 72b/73a., in his stead, of his sons. One whose son will serve in his stead [brings a tenth of an ephah.] This excludes the Anointed for War whose son will not serve in his stead. From where that the Anointed’s for War son will not serve in his stead? The verse says¹³³ 29:30, seven days shall the priest wear them in his stead, one of his sons. If one officiates in the Tent of Meeting, his son will stand in his stead. This excludes the Anointed for War who does not officiate in the Tent of Meeting, From where that he can be appointed as High Priest? ¹³⁴ 9:20. The leader of the priests is the High Priest. Phineas was appointed Anointed for War by Moses, Num. 31:6.[As it is said,] Phineas the son of Eleazar was leader over them; in earlier times the Eternal was with him. When Rebbi Yose wanted to needle Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose, he said to him, “before, he was with him.” In the days of Zimri¹³⁵ 27:1–15., he protested. In the days of the concubine at Gibea¹³⁶ 19–21. In the opinion of Seder Olam, based on the teachings of R. Yose the Tanna (who is the R. Yose quoted here), the affair at Gibea happened at the start of the period of the Judges, when Phineas was High Priest. Cf. the author’s edition of Seder Olam (Northvale NJ 1998), pp. 122–123., he did not protest.

footnotes: ¹³⁰ he one appointed to deliver the exhortations prescribed in Deut. ¹³¹ Prescribed for the High Priest in Lev. ¹³² Ex. ¹³³ Ex. ¹³⁴ 1Chr. ¹³⁵ Num. ¹³⁶ Jud.

And from where that he was asked in eight¹³⁷. 28:30) it is obvious that the Anointed for War must wear one of these garments for the oracle. But since all eight garments of the High Priest form an indivisible unit, he must wear all of them.? Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan : And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants [in his stead]¹³⁸. 29:30 continues: To be anointed in them and inducted into office. Since the one Anointed for War is anointed, he seems to qualify.. Why does the verse say, in his stead? For greatness after him¹³⁹. And from where that he officiated in eight? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan : And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants. Why does the verse say, in his stead? For sanctity after him. Rebbi Jonah said to him, I was with you;¹⁴⁰ he did not say “officiated” but “was asked”. [In how many was he asked?] Rav Hoshaia brought a Mishnah of Bar Qappara from the South which stated: He officiates neither in the eight of a High Priest nor in the four of a common priest. Rebbi Abba said, it would be logical that he officiate in four. Why did they say that he did not officiate? Lest people say, we saw a High Priest who sometimes officiated in four like a simple priest. Rebbi Jonah said, would he not officiate inside and would he not be asked outside? Does one err between inside and outside? But did Rebbi Tarphon, the father of all of Israel, not err between blowing for assembly and the blowing for a sacrifice? As it is written: The descendants of Aaron, the priests, shall blow the trumpets¹⁴¹. 10:8., blameless ones, not with bodily defects, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons if I did not see my mother’s brother, lame in one of his legs, standing in the Temple court with his trumpet in his hand and blowing! Rebbi Aqiba answered him, Rebbi, maybe you saw him only at the time of assembly¹⁴¹. 10:8.; but I was saying, at the time of sacrifices. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons but you did not deviate right or left. I am the one who heard but I could not explain¹⁴². 10:3) is extended to use trumpets to introduce the public Torah reading in the Temple at Tabernacles in the Sabbatical Year (Deut. 31:10–13).. You derive it and agree with tradition. Therefore, anybody who separates from you is as if he separated himself from his life.

footnotes: ¹³⁷ The paragraph discusses the rules for the priest Anointed for War. It starts with an assertion that the Anointed for War officiates in the Temple in the High Priest’s garb while later it is asserted without dissent that he be barred from any service in the Sanctuary. The entire topic is a reconstruction of the environment in which one has to place David’s inquiries to God as recorded in the books of Samuel.The Anointed for War has two jobs. One is to address the army as described in Deut. 20:1–9, the other to ask the Urim and Tummim oracle on behalf of the army commander. Since this oracle is mentioned only in connection with the High Priest’s garments (Ex ¹³⁸ Ex ¹³⁹ Since the Anointed for War was anointed, he seems to qualify. ¹⁴⁰ The name of R. Jonah’s interlocutor is not given. It must be another student of R. Jeremiah (R. Yose?) since he points out that the words of his teacher were incorrectly transmitted and that R. Jeremiah’s statement was identical with that of R. Abba bar Ḥiyya, the companion of R. Jeremiah’s teacher R. Zeˋira. In the Babli, 73a, the students of R. Joḥanan point out that R. Joḥanan only gave his opinion on interrogation of the oracle, not of officiating. ¹⁴¹ Num ¹⁴¹ Num ¹⁴² The command to call all the community in the desert by the sound of trumpets (Num

The priest shall atone who was anointed¹⁴⁴. 16:32. The problem is the legitimacy of a priest appointed ad hoc as High Priest to conduct the service of the Day of Atonement for which common priests are disqualified. Sifra Aḥara Mot Pereq 8((4–5).. Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where to include another priest? The verse says, who was anointed; with the anointing oil. From where the one clothed in multiple garb¹⁴⁵? The verse says, who was inducted into office. And from where another who was appointed¹⁴⁶? The verse says, the priest shall atone¹⁴⁷. How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth¹⁴⁸. כהן).. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court for Israel.¹⁴⁹ 5:6. The oral promise was irrevocable. Here end the parallels in Horaiot and Megillah.”

footnotes: ¹⁴⁴ Lev ¹⁴⁵ The High Priest in Second Temple times who was not anointed since the anointing oil prepared by Moses was lost. ¹⁴⁶ In an emergency of the Day of Atonement where no formal session of a court can be held. Even when anointing oil was available, simple investiture was enough. ¹⁴⁷ Since it does not stress “the High Priest”, it follows that any priest can be appointed to fill the office. ¹⁴⁸ It does not need the laying on of hands nor a document of appointment. (Tosaphot 12b s, v ¹⁴⁹ Mishnah Idiut

“From where that just as one prepares another Cohen in his stead for maybe a disability will happen to him, so one preliminarily marries to him another wife in case something happen to his wife, as it is said¹⁵⁰.16:11., and he atone for himself and for his house; his house is his wife, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Yose said to him, in that case there is no end to it, maybe not only this wife but also the other wife would die¹⁵¹ 8(6). He cannot marry her outright since a High Priest (and any priest aspiring to that position) is restricted to a single wife, as explained later in the paragraph..” Rebbi Mana said, before you question Rebbi Jehudah, question Rebbi Jehudah, question the rabbis! Maybe an emission¹⁵² would happen both to this Cohen and to the other Cohen. Emissions are frequent¹⁵⁴ 3:3 (Note 79). While the Mishnah is anonymous, the fact that R. Jehudah does not oppose the ruling indicates that he approves of it., death is not frequent. They decided about what is frequent, but did not decide about what is infrequent. We find that Rebbi Jehudah said, death is frequent; that is what we have stated there: “Rebbi Jehudah says, one also prepares for him another wife, maybe his wife would die.” There we have stated¹⁵⁴ 3:3 (Note 79). While the Mishnah is anonymous, the fact that R. Jehudah does not oppose the ruling indicates that he approves of it.: “One who brings a bill of divorce and left him old or sick, delivers to her under the presumption that the man be alive.” There you are saying, death is infrequent, and here you are saying, death is frequent. There it is a private matter, here a public act. Is one more restrictive in public acts, as we have stated¹⁵⁵ 3:3, Gittin 7:4 (Notes 195–107). The horns were openings of boxes where people could deposit money for specified sacrifices and assume that the boxes would be emptied every day and the necessary sacrifices offered. In particular a woman after childbirth who may not eat sancta unless she brought her purification sacrifice may deposit the money and eat sancta after sundown without inquiring whether the offering had actually been brought. A “nest” is a couple of pigeons or turtle-doves.: “Rebbi Jehudah says, there was no horn for nests in Jerusalem because of mixing, maybe one of them¹⁵⁶ would die and it would turn out that money of purification sacrifices that must be left to die is mixed up in the offering.” Could he not preliminarily marry her yesterday? And he atone for himself and for his house; but not for two houses. Rebbi Gamliel bar Inyani asked before Rebbi Mana: Is he not like one who acquires something on the Sabbath¹⁵⁶? He answered him, it is because they permitted Sabbath restriction in the Sanctuary. Rebbi Mana said, this implies that those who marry a widow must take her in when it is still daytime, lest he be like someone who acquires on the Sabbath¹⁵⁷.

footnotes: ¹⁵⁰ Lev ¹⁵¹ Sifra Aḥara Mot Pereq ¹⁵² Emission of semen, an example of impurity which even if removed immediately disables a person from performing sacral acts before the next sundown. ¹⁵⁴ Mishnah Gittin ¹⁵⁴ Mishnah Gittin ¹⁵⁵ Babli 55a, Tosephta Šeqalim ¹⁵⁶ If a woman designates a couple of birds as her sacrifice, one of them is a purification sacrifice. If she dies between designation and offering, the purification sacrifice can neither be offered nor redeemed. Therefore the money which she deposited in the horn cannot be used, but it cannot be determined which coins are those coming from her. ¹⁵⁶ If a woman designates a couple of birds as her sacrifice, one of them is a purification sacrifice. If she dies between designation and offering, the purification sacrifice can neither be offered nor redeemed. Therefore the money which she deposited in the horn cannot be used, but it cannot be determined which coins are those coming from her. ¹⁵⁷ Since the Day of Atonement follows the Sabbath rules and the High Priest would have to get a new wife immediately if his wife die after nightfall of the day, should not his wife’s death disqualify him from the service since preliminary marriage is an act of acquisition forbidden on the Sabbath? (Since the High Priest is forbidden to defile himself for any corpse, in contrast to a common priest he is not disabled by the death of a close relative.)

MISHNAH: All seven days he pours the blood¹⁵⁹, and burns the incense, and cleans the lights¹⁶⁰, and brings head and feet to the altar¹⁶¹. On any other day, if he wants to sacrifice he sacrifices since the High Priest is first in line to sacrifice his part¹⁶² and to take his part¹⁶³.

footnotes: ¹⁵⁹ Of the daily sacrifice, so that he should be used to it since on the Day of Atonement he has to perform all sacrificial acts unaided. ¹⁶⁰ Of the candelabrum in the Temple, including lighting it anew; this also is his duty on the Day of Atonement. ¹⁶¹ The parts which are taken first to the altar (Mishnah 2:7). ¹⁶² While in general jobs in the Temple service are distributed by a lottery, the High Priest may perform any duty he chooses before the other jobs are distributed. ¹⁶³ Even if he did not participate in the sacrificial acts.

HALAKHAH: Does he not become impure because of his sprinklings¹⁶⁴ 129, based on *Num.*19:21)? Cf. Note 17.? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, they were sprinkling on him after he had brought his offerings.

footnotes: ¹⁶⁴ How can the High Priest officiate if he is sprinkled with the water containing ashes of the Red Cow (Note 95) since the ashes, while cleansing the person impure in the impurity of the dead, are defiling a pure person (Sifry Num.

“Since the High Priest is first in line to sacrifice and to take his part first.” How is this? “¹⁶⁵ This skin is mine; one loaf of the Two Breads¹⁶⁶, five loaves of the shew-bread.¹⁶⁷” In one case he takes everything, in the other case he takes half? Rebbi Zeˋira said, in the first case, a private sacrifice, in the other case, a public sacrifice. It was stated:¹⁶⁵ “Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes only one half.” There are Tannaim who state, “Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes one half.” How is that? If there was one skin. The rabbis say, he takes it whole. Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes only one half. If there were four, five skins. The rabbis say, he takes one¹⁶⁸. Rebbi said, I am saying that he takes half. What is Rebbi’s reason? The remainder of the offering is for Aaron and his sons¹⁶⁹ 2:3. Sifra Wayyiqra I Pereq11(1).. Do we not know that Aaron is together with his sons? Why does the verse say¹⁷⁰ 24:9 (on the shew-bread); Sifra Emor Pereq 18(10)., for Aaron and his sons? But it means, Aaron shall take half of it and his sons shall take half.

footnotes: ¹⁶⁵ Tosephta 1:5, Babli 17b. ¹⁶⁶ The two leavened breads as public offering on Pentecost. ¹⁶⁷ Of the 12 shew breads becoming available every Sabbath. ¹⁶⁵ Tosephta 1:5, Babli 17b. ¹⁶⁸ Since the Mishnah states that he takes “a part”. ¹⁶⁹ Lev. ¹⁷⁰ Lev.

As in the following: The city council¹⁷¹ and the military district¹⁷² had to bring a gift¹⁷³. The case came before Rebbi who said, the city council is not included in the military district. For which purpose did he say “city council and military district”? But that each party give one half. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi follows his opinion, as Rebbi said, fo r Aaron and his sons, half for Aaron and half for his sons.

footnotes: ¹⁷¹ Greek βουλή, ἡ. ¹⁷² Greek στρατήγιον, τό, “the general’s tent”, the rural district under the direct command of the local military commander, not under the authority of the city council. ¹⁷³ The entire district was under the obligation to contribute to a “voluntary” gift, such as crown money at the accession of a new emperor, requested (imposed) by the government.

Rebbi Abba bar Mamal objected: Does not a baraita disagree? “¹⁷⁴12:7. lf somebody says, I am taking on me the obligation to bring 100 esronim¹⁷⁵ one tenth of an ephah, or 3/10 of a seˋah, approximately 3.6 liter. in two vessels, he shall bring 50 in one vessel each. But if he brought 60¹⁷⁶ it is a rule (Mishnah Menaḥot12:4) that the maximum flour offering which can be brought in one vessel is 60 esronim. in one vessel and 40 in the other, he has fulfilled his obligation.” Somebody could say, I am taking on me the obligation to bring 100 esronim, simply, without specifying the number of vessels in which be brings them; why does he specify “to bring them in two vessels”? To bring them 50 in one vessel each/ And we have stated on this, if he brought 60 in one vessel and 40 in the other, he has fulfilled his obligation¹⁷⁷! Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, since up to 60 they can be mixed¹⁷⁸12:4; Tosephta 12:8–9/, it is as if from the start he fixed it at 60. It would be necessary to say, “if somebody says, I am taking on me the obligation to bring 60 esronim in two vessels, he shall bring 30 in one vessel each. But if he brought 40 in one vessel and 20 in the other, he has fulfilled his obligation.¹⁷⁹ which does not involve 60 esronim.” It was found stated thus¹⁸⁰.

footnotes: ¹⁷⁴ Tosephta Menaḥot ¹⁷⁵ The flour offerings in the Temple were all multiples of the issaron, ¹⁷⁶ As quoted later in this paragraph, since flour offerings have to be brought mixed with oil, ¹⁷⁷ This is the essence of R. Abba bar Mamal’s objection to Rebbi’s interpretation of the verse. Since even if it should be clear that the intent was to split evenly, it is not a strict condition, therefore Rebbi’s inference that the verse prescribes an even split between Aaron and his sons is not justified. ¹⁷⁸ Mishnah Menaḥot ¹⁷⁹ R. Abba bar Mamal’s objection could only be substantiated by a baraita ¹⁸⁰ Therefore Rebbi’s argument has to be rejected.

Rebbi Ḥananiah the colleague of the rabbis asked: May one infer law of obligations from issaron¹⁸¹? It was found stated¹⁸² which supports R. Abba bar Mamal. It is not clear which subject and which person the baraita refers to., “he inferred law of obligations from issaron.” Rebbi Abun said, only he should not bring them¹⁸³. in three vessels. Rebbi Abba Mamal said, even in many vessels.

footnotes: ¹⁸¹ Since the Temple rules belong to ritual law, but the right of the High Priest is a matter of monetary claim, do they necessarily follow identical rules? ¹⁸² There was found a baraita ¹⁸³ The person offering 60 esronim

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Every day¹⁸⁴ the High Priest dresses in his robes¹⁸⁵, comes, and sacrifices the daily morning sacrifice. If there are vows or voluntary sacrifices¹⁸⁶, he offers them. Then he goes to his house, and returns to bring the daily evening sacrifice, and comes to stay overnight in the Palhedrin lodge. Rebbi Uqba in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: He did this only on Sabbath and holidays¹⁸⁷.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁴ Of the seven days of preparation. ¹⁸⁵ The eight garments prescribed for the High Priest. ¹⁸⁶ The legal difference between a vow and a voluntary offering, which also needs dedication, is that a vow is formulated as a personal obligation, “I am taking upon me the obligation to offer such and such a sacrifice.” In that case, if the animal selected for the sacrifice becomes disqualified for any reason, the maker of the vow has to bring a replacement. A voluntary offering is a dedication, “this animal shall be such-and-such a sacrifice.” If the animal becomes disqualified, no replacement is due. ¹⁸⁷ He seems to imply every Sabbath and holiday during the year, including New Year’s Day and the Sabbath preceding the day of Atonement.

There are Tannaim who state: the diadem¹⁸⁸ 28:36–38) which is worn to eliminate iniquities of sancta, to legitimate sacrifices even if they do not completely satisfy the prescribed rules. propitiates on his forehead. There are Tannaim who state: even in a corner. He who says, the diadem propitiates on his forehead, it always shall be on his forehead¹⁸⁹. 29:38.. But he who says, even in a corner, from the Day of Atonement¹⁹⁰. He who says, the diadem propitiates on his forehead, supports Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun; he who says, even in a corner, supports Rebbi Uqba.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁸ The diadem (Ex. ¹⁸⁹ Ex ¹⁹⁰ When the High Priest officiates in white robes without the diadem.

MISHNAH: One sends him Elders from the Elders of the Court¹⁹¹; they read before him the Order of the Day¹⁹². 16. and say to him, Sir High Priest, read yourself with your mouth, maybe you forgot, or maybe you never learned. In the morning of the eve of the Day of Atonement one makes him stand at the Eastern Gate and brings before him oxen, and he-goats, and sheep, so he should recognize and be used to the service.

footnotes: ¹⁹¹ The Pharisaic High Court. The Mishnah has to be dated to Herodian times since the Hasmonean kings all acted as High Priests. ¹⁹² Lev

HALAKHAH: “Maybe you forgot, or maybe you never learned.” Did we not state¹⁹³, “the priest, greater than his brethren¹⁹⁴. 21:10., that his greatness be from his brethren¹⁹⁵, on whose head the anointing oil was poured. Rebbi says, in beauty, in riches, in wisdom¹⁹⁶, and in looks.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there in the first [Temple], here in the second¹⁹⁷ 3:4), the verse does not necessarily apply to Second Temple High Priests..

footnotes: ¹⁹³ Tosephta 1:6. ¹⁹⁴ Lev ¹⁹⁵ If he was not rich, the other Cohanim should donate money to make him rich. ¹⁹⁶ Therefore an ignorant High Priest should be an impossibility. ¹⁹⁷ Since these High Priests were not anointed (cf. Horaiot

“One makes him stand at the Eastern Gates.” Where does one let him stand, inside or outside? If you are saying inside, what we stated there¹⁹⁸ it follows that a pure person may enter the Temple courtyard without an additional immersion if he does not intend to serve there. Therefore if the High Priest was standing inside the gate, the Mishnah here agrees with the Mishnah there that the first immersion of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement is not connected with the special rules of that day. But if he was standing outside, no immersion is required, and nothing can be inferred from the Mishnah here., “five immersions were there on that day, one because nobody entered the Temple courtyard for service, even if he was pure, unless he immersed himself, and four because of the Day of Atonement.” If you are saying outside, all of them were because of the Day of Atonement.

footnotes: ¹⁹⁸ A reformulation of Mishnah 3:3. Since the Mishnah here states that one lets him stand at the gate but not that he has first to immerse himself in a miqweh,

“One brings before him oxen, and he-goats, and sheep.” Why did he not say, a? Rebbi Abba from Carthage said, is he not anyhow obliged to pour?²⁰⁰ It was found stated, “and a goat”²⁰¹.

footnotes: ²⁰⁰ Even though this sentence seems to be part of this Halakhah in a badly preserved Genizah fragment (Ginzberg p. 117), it does not belong here but is a statement (quoted there in the name of R. Mana) in Halakhah 5:6 (Note 187). ²⁰¹ Babli 18a.

MISHNAH: All of the seven days one does not prevent him from food and drink. On the Eve of the Day of Atonement one does not allow him to eat much because food induces sleep²⁰².

footnotes: ²⁰² And in the following night he was not permitted to sleep.

HALAKHAH: It was stated²⁰¹: One allows him neither milk, nor eggs, nor cheese, nor fat meat, nor old wine, nor spiced wine, nor bean groats, nor lentils, Samuel said, nor citrus medica, nor anything which causes emission of semen. Nevertheless one was quoting for him the verse²⁰³ 127:1. If the Eternal does not build the house, in vain toil its builders., if the Eternal does not build the house, etc. But was this not of the miracles which happened in the Temple²⁰⁴ 5:5. One of the ten miracles was that never was the High Priest incapacitated by an emission of semen on the Day of Atonement.? Rebbi Abun said, because of you shall not try²⁰⁵ 6:16.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there in the first {Temple}, here in the second²⁰⁶ 5:5 applies only to the First Temple..

footnotes: ²⁰¹ Babli 18a. ²⁰³ Ps. ²⁰⁴ Enumerated in Mishnah Avot ²⁰⁵ Deut. ²⁰⁶ Mishnah Avot

MISHNAH: The Elders of the Court hand him over to the Elders of the priesthood; they lead him to the upper floor of the house of Eutinoos²⁰⁷ 1:1.) They had first to instruct him in the Pharisee interpretation of the verses since the matter of presentation of the incense in the Temple was the only matter of controversy between Sadducees and Pharisees in the service of the day of Atonement. Then they had to make him swear to follow the Pharisaic rules. They adjure him; this finishes their task and they leave. They say to him, Sir High Priest, we are the agents of the Court, and you are our agent and the Court’s agent. We adjure you by Him Who let His Name dwell in this House that you will not change anything of all we told you. He turns aside and cries, and they turn aside and cry²⁰⁸.

footnotes: ²⁰⁷ The place where the incense was prepared for use in the Temple.(Mishnah 3:11, Tamid ²⁰⁸ As explained in the Halakhah.

HALAKHAH: It²⁰⁹ was located on top the the Water Gate²¹⁰ and close to his lodge.

footnotes: ²⁰⁹ The place where incense was prepared. ²¹⁰ The fourth gate on the South side of the Temple precinct proper. Babli 19a.

“He turns aside and cries,” that he was suspected. “And they turn aside and cry,” that they needed to do this²¹¹. And why does one adjure him? Because of the Boethusians, who were saying that he starts the incense outside and brings it inside²¹² 16:13: He shall put the incense on the fire before the Eternal, and the incense cloud shall cover the cover which is on the testimonials so that he should not die. The Pharisaic interpretation is that the first part of the verse implies that the incense should be put into the fire inside the Holiest of Holies, which is before the Eternal. The Boethusian interpretation is based on the second part of the verse, that the cloud should cover him already at the entry into the Holiest of Holies..

footnotes: ²¹¹ Babli 19b, Tosephta 1:8. ²¹² The problem is Lev.

²¹¹ It happened that one person started the incense outside and brought it inside. When he left, he said to his father, even though you were interpreting all your days, you did not act until this man came and acted. He answered him, even though you were interpreting all our days, we acted only following the will of the Sages. I am wondering whether this man will have many days in the world. After a short time he died. But some are saying, his nose gushed out worms and something like a calf’s hoof grew in his brain.

footnotes: ²¹¹ Babli 19b, Tosephta 1:8.

²¹³ 4:8 (ב). It is an intellectual construct, rather than a historical report. Some want to say, he was the same for the Cow²¹⁴ 3:8 with what is presumed here: “It happened that a Sadducee was pure from the preceding sundown when he came to burn the Cow, but Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai realized it; he came and leaned both of his hands on him and told him, Sir High Priest, how wonderful you are as High Priest, go and immerse yourself. He went down and immersed himself. After he came back he grated his earlobe and said to him, Ben Zakkai, when I shall be free to deal with you; he answered him, if you will be free. It was not three days before they put him in the grave.” Biblical impurity is only original impurity and derivative impurity in the first degree. Rabbinic impurity has derivative impurity in the second degree for unwashed hands, third degree impurity for heave, and fourth degree for sacrifices. Therefore, the intrinsically pure Ben Zakkai (who before the destruction of the Temple was not Rabban), by putting his second degree impure hands on the priest defiled the latter for sacra and forced him to immerse himself in a miqweh. Our sources seem to describe the Sadducee position correctly; cf. Dead Sea Scrolls fragment 4Q394, lines 16–18., on Tabernacles²¹⁵ 4:8, Tosephta Sukkah3:16. The popular ceremony of water offering on the altar has no explicit foundation in the biblical text and was opposed by Sadducees (possibly only by the Boethusian sect.) A priest who poured out the water in contempt of the rite was killed by the etrogim(citrus medica) which the people threw at him., and on the Day of Atonement. Rebbi Simon does not say so, but either the Cow and Tabernacles was one and Atonement one, or Cow and Atonement was one and Tabernacles one. He who said, after a short time he died, he did all three. He who said, his nose gushed out worms and something like a calf’s hoof grew in his brain, follows him who said, either Cow and Tabernacles was one and Atonement one, or Cow and Atonement was one and Tabernacles one. The Courtyard cried about them, get out of here, sons of Eli, you defiled our God’s Temple²¹⁶ 57a, Keritut 28a.. “On that day²¹⁷ at the priest standing on the altar. Tosephta Sukkah 3:16; Babli Sukkah48b., the corner of the altar was damaged and they put a block of salt there lest it should look deficient since any altar without corner, or walkway²¹⁸, or base²¹⁹ is disqualified.”

footnotes: ²¹³ This text also appears in Sukkah ²¹⁴ Where the Sadducees insisted that the Cohen who burns the Red Cow must be pure from the preceding sundown. However, it is difficult to square what is reported in Tosephta Parah ²¹⁵ Mishnah Sukkah ²¹⁶ . Babli Pesaḥim ²¹⁷ At Tabernacles, when the people threw their etrogim ²¹⁸ The extension at half-height of the altar, allowing a priest to walk around the altar and pour blood at its four corners. ²¹⁹ . A hollow at the base of the altar into which remnants of sacrificial blood were poured.

They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written²²⁰ 16:17., nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written²²¹ 1:10., the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting²²²1:7)? He answered them, if he enters following normal rules

footnotes: ²²⁰ .Lev. ²²¹ Ez. ²²² If the offending priest was hit on his head by a calf’s foot it must have been by one of the four-headed angels seen by Ezechiel whose feet are calves’ feet (Ez.

²²³ 3(11). It is written²²⁴ 16:12–13. and he shall bring it inside the curtain, and put the incense in the fire before the Eternal, that he should not prepare outside and bring inside, since the Sadducees are saying, he shall prepare outside and then bring inside. If one does this before flesh and blood, a fortiori before the Omnipresent. Also it says²²⁵ 16:2., for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover. The Sages said to them, has it not already been said, he shall put the incense in the fire before the Eternal; only inside he puts it on. If it is so, why was it said, for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover? This teaches that he has to put in smoke-creating herb. From where that he has to add smoke-creating herb? The verse says²²⁶ 16:13., the incense shall cover the cover over the chest²²⁷,lest he die. If he failed to add smoke-creating herb or left out any of its ingredients he has committed a deadly sin²²⁸ 6a.. Lest he die, that is the punishment. For in a cloud I shall appear over the cover, this is the warning.

footnotes: ²²³ Babli 53a, Sifra Aḥare Pereq ²²⁴ Lev. ²²⁵ Lev. ²²⁶ Lev. ²²⁷ Corrector’s misquote. ²²⁸ Babli Keritut

²²⁹ (13). Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon said, I could think that punishment and warning had been said before the death of the two sons of Aaron, the verse says²³⁰ 16:1., after the death of the two sons of Aaron. If after the death of the two sons of Aaron. I could think that both had been said after the death of the two sons of Aaron, the verse says, for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover. How is that? The warning was said before the death of the two sons of Aaron, but the punishment was said after the death of the two sons of Aaron, Rebbi Zeˋura said, it does not say “because in a cloud I was seen over the cover,” but I shall be seen. From here that the Holy One, praise to Him, does not punish unless he had warned²³¹.

footnotes: ²²⁹ Sifra A hare Introduction ²³⁰ Lev. ²³¹ The tannaitic position is rejected. While the death of the two sons of Aaron made an atonement ceremony necessary, their deaths cannot be punishment for infractions of laws not yet promulgated.

MISHNAH: If he was a scholar, he preaches²³²; otherwise scholars preach before him. If he was used to reciting²³³ he recites; otherwise one recites before him. What does one recite before him? Job, Ezra, and Chronicles. Zacariah ben Qebutal says, many times I recited before him from Daniel.

footnotes: ²³² Explains biblical verses either legalistically or as homilies. ²³³ As technical term, קורא always means reading biblical texts with the masoretic accents. (which in those times were not written but had to be memorized.)

HALAKHAH: It was stated, in Proverbs and Psalms, since their interest makes sleep disappear.

Cahana asked Rav, how shall we state, Qebutar or Qebutal²³⁴ and l but between b and p with opposite readings in the printed edition and the Munich ms.? He was standing in prayer and indicated to him by his finger, a bird, kabōtar²³⁵ in Pahlevi, كبوتر kabūtar in Farsi..

footnotes: ²³⁴ Babli 19b; there the question is not between r ²³⁵ “Dove”. kabōtar

MISHNAH: If he became sleepy, the young priests drum before him with a dry finger and say to him, Sir High Priest, stand up and take it easy once on the floor. One occupies him until the time of slaughter.

HALAKHAH: Rav Ḥuna said, “with a dry finger” orally. But Rebbi Joḥanan said, “with a dry finger”, with the hand. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan “orally, not with harp nor with lute.²³⁶” He explains it, the melody indicated by the dry finger one says orally, not with harp nor with lute.

footnotes: ²³⁶ Tosephta 1:9, Babli 19b.

MISHNAH: Every day one removes ashes from the altar²³⁷6:1–6. about at the call of the cock, before it or after it. But on the Day of Atonement at midnight²³⁸, and on holidays after the first watch²³⁹. The cock did not crow²⁴⁰ before the Courtyard was full of Israel.

footnotes: ²³⁷ The removal of the ashes from the previous day is the required action before the service of the new day may start; Lev. ²³⁸ To let the High Priest start the office of the day at the earliest possible moment. ²³⁹ The end of the first third of the night. On holidays not only were there many additional public offerings but also a very great number of private holiday offerings' taking up the entire day. ²⁴⁰ On holidays and the Day of Atonement.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Mana said, would it not be understandable if on the day of Atonement it were after the first watch and on holidays from midnight, that they²⁴¹ should not become thirsty? Rebbi Joḥanan said, the removal of ashes is the start of the service of the next say and one had to sanctify his hands and feet from the basin which was immersed in water²⁴²30:17–21. But the water used on one day would become unusable the next day unless it is at least 40 seˋah, the minimum volume of a miqweh whose water always is pure. Therefore the wash basin of the priests has to be immersed in a large miqweh during the night and can be lifted for easy use only at dawn. For the removal of ashes on the special days, hands and feet have to be washed in the miqweh. In the interpretation of the Babli Zevaḥim 21b, R. Joḥanan holds that since the removal of the ashes is the start of the service of the next day, the Cohen washing for the removal does not have to wash again for the morning service..

footnotes: ²⁴¹ Everybody involved in the service of the fast day. R. Mana’s opinion is not mentioned in the Babli. ²⁴² Washing hands and feet before any sacral act is an absolute requirement, Ex.