יומא 34 — Soncino English Talmud

¹To teach us that it said: And he shall lay the burnt-offering in order upon it, and Raba said ‘the burnt-offering’ [means] this is the first burnt-offering. ‘And the meal-offering [shall precede] the pancakes’ — [For Scripture reads]: Burnt-offering and meal-offering. ‘And the pancakes precede the drink-offerings’, they, too, are considered a species of a meal-offering. ‘And the drink-offerings [come before] the additional offerings as is is written: A sacrifice and drink-offerings. ‘And the additional sacrifices [come before] the [frankincense] censers’ — But has it not been taught: The [frankincense] censers come before the additional sacrifices? — This is a matter concerning which Tannaim are disputing. Abaye said: The view that the additional offerings precede the [frankincense] censers seems more logical, for did you not say that the words ‘In the morning, in the morning’ imply that it is to receive preference before all, thus do the words ‘on the day . . . on the day’ indicate that it is to be [offered up] last [in the day]. What is the reason of him who holds that the [frankincense] censers come before the additional offerings? — He infers it from the identical expression ‘statute’ which occurs with the pancakes. If he infers it hence, let him do so complete? — Here [the words] ‘on the day . . . on the day’ come in to intimate that they [the frankincense censers] are offered up last [in the day]. THE INCENSE OF THE MORNING WAS OFFERED UP BETWEEN THE LIMBS AND THE DRINK-OFFERINGS. According to whom [is this teaching]? If according to the Rabbis, it should come between the blood and the lamps; if according to Abba Saul, it should come between the lamps and the limbs? — In truth it is in accord with the Rabbis, but he does not treat of the order here. THE INCENSE OF THE AFTERNOON WAS OFFERED UP BETWEEN THE [SMOKING OF THE] LIMBS AND THE DRINK-OFFERINGS. Whence do we know these things? — R. Johanan said: Because Scripture said: As the meal-offering of the morning, and as the drink-offering thereof, thou shalt present it, i.e., just as with the meal-offering of the morning the incense precedes the drink-offerings, so also here the incense shall come before the drink-offerings. But then, just as there the incense precedes the [smoking] of the limbs, here too the incense should come before the limbs? Is it written: ‘As the limbs of the morning’? It is written: ‘As the meal-offering of the morning’, which means: As the meal-offering of the morning, but not as the [smoking of the] limbs of the morning. Our Rabbis taught: And the drink-offering thereof shall be the fourth part of a hin: let him infer [the need of a drink-offering] for the morning sacrifice from the evening sacrifice.^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ

^ᵃnote:Lev. VI, 5.
^ᵇnote:Cf. Hor. 12a.
^ᶜnote:Lev. XXIII, 37: These are the appointed seasons of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to bring an offering made by fire unto the Lord, a burnt-offering, and a meal-offering, a sacrifice, and drink-offerings, each on its own day. This is the prescribed order, not to be interfered with.
^ᵈnote:Ibid.
^ᵉnote:Pes. 58a.
^ᶠnote:Ibid. XXIV, 8: on the day of the Sabbath, on the day of the Sabbath, shall he set it in order before the Lord, continually. Just as In the morning, in the morning’ was accepted as an intimation that it shall be early in the morning, so ‘On the day, on the day’ may fitly be assumed to be an indication that it is to be offered last in the day.
^ᵍnote:Concerning the pancakes, the word ‘statute’ is used in Lev. VI, 15, as in connection with the frankincense censers, ibid. XXIV, 9. Just as pancakes take precedence over additional offerings, so do the frankincense censers.
^ʰnote:That the frankincense censers should have precedence over the the drink-offerings too.
^ⁱnote:[That the incense was offered between the trimming of the five lamps and the two lamps, v. supra 15a.]
^ʲnote:[I.e., before completing the trimming of the lamps.]
^ᵏnote:V. supra 33a.
^ˡnote:[He was not too particular in regard to the details of the order (Rashi). On this view it could be also in accord with Abba Saul, but it is preferable to make the Mishnah in agreement with the majority of Rabbis (Rashi).]
^ᵐnote:Num. XXVIII, 8.
^ⁿnote:Ibid. 7.

²Rabbi said: For the evening sacrifice from the morning sacrifice! It is quite right according to the Rabbis, for that is written [specifically] in connection with the continual offering of the evening, but what is the ground of Rabbi's statement? — Rabbah b. ‘Ulla said: Scripture said: ‘For the one lamb’. Now which is the lamb in connection with which the word ehad [one] is used? Say: It is the lamb of the continual offering of the morning. And what do the Rabbis [reply]? — ‘Ehad’, i.e., the unique, the best of the flock. And [what is] Rabbi's [answer]? — He infers that from: And all your choice vows. And the Rabbis? — One speaks of freewill-[offerings], the other of obligatory [offerings] and both need special mention. IF THE HIGH PRIEST WAS OLD OR OF DELICATE HEALTH etc. It was taught: R. Judah said: Lumps of wrought iron were heated on the eve of the Day of Atonement and were cast into the cold water to mitigate the coldness. But was [one] not thereby hardening them? — R. Bibi said: [The heat] did not reach the hardening point. Abaye said: Even assume it did reach the hardening point, [a forbidden] act which was produced without intent, is permitted. But did Abaye say that? Has it not been taught: The flesh of his foreskin — even though a white spot is there may he cut it off, these are the words of R. Josiah. And we asked investigatingly concerning it: Why is a Scriptural statement necessary for that, and Abaye said: This was in accord with R. Judah who said: A forbidden act produced without intent, remains forbidden! That applies only to forbidden things in the whole Torah, but here hardening is [forbidden] only by Rabbinic ordination. MISHNAH. THEY BROUGHT HIM TO THE PARWAH CELL-WHICH WAS ON HOLY GROUND. THEY SPREAD A SHEET OF BYSSUS [LINEN] BETWEEN HIM AND THE PEOPLE. HE SANCTIFIED HIS HANDS AND HIS FEET AND STRIPPED. R. MEIR SAID: HE STRIPPED, SANCTIFIED HIS HANDS AND HIS FEET. HE WENT DOWN AND IMMERSED HIMSELF, CAME UP AND DRIED HIMSELF. AFTERWARDS THEY BROUGHT HIM WHITE GARMENTS. HE PUT THEM ON AND SANCTIFIED HIS HANDS AND HIS FEET. IN THE MORNING HE PUT ON PELUSIUM LINEN WORTH TWELVE MINAS, IN THE AFTERNOON INDIAN LINEN WORTH EIGHT HUNDRED ZUZ. THESE ARE THE WORDS OF R. MEIR. THE SAGES SAY: IN THE MORNING HE PUT ON [GARMENTS] WORTH EIGHTEEN MINAS AND IN THE AFTERNOON [GARMENTS] WORTH TWELVE MINAS, ALTOGETHER THIRTY MINAS. ALL THAT AT THE CHARGE OF THE COMMUNITY AND IF HE WANTED TO SPEND MORE OF HIS OWN HE COULD DO SO.^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ

^ᵒnote:Just as the one requires drink-offering, so does the other. The practical difference: The case of a community who had enough for only one drink-offering. According to the opinion that one must infer the regulation for the afternoon-offering from the morning-offering, the latter is more important and the drink-offering would have to be allotted to the morning-offering. (Tosaf. s.v.hrc.) The basis of the discussion: To which of the two continual offerings does the phrase ‘for the one lamb’ (Num. XXVIII, 7) refer? The Sages hold it refers to the last named, the afternoon-offering, whereas Rabbi holds that it recalls the morning-offering, where the same phrase (‘one’) is used (verse 4).
^ᵖnote:The last named of the two.
^ᵠnote:Num. XXVIII, 7.
^ʳnote:V. Ibid. 4.
^ˢnote:That particular meaning of ‘ehad’, as applied to the continual offering.
^ᵗnote:Deut. XII, 11.
^ᵘnote:As arguments may be advanced in favour of each requiring to be of the best, to the exclusion of the other.
^ᵛnote:Which is forbidden on any holy day, how much more on the solemn Day of Atonement.
^ʷnote:Shab. 41b.
^ˣnote:Shab. 133a.
^ʸnote:Lev. XII, 3.
^ᶻnote:Of leprosy, which normally must not be removed by surgery.
^ᵃᵃnote:The word ‘flesh’ here is superfluous, hence we infer therefrom that no matter how the flesh be (even leprous) he may circumcise it.
^ᵃᵇnote:Since it was a forbidden act produced without intent, it seems self-evident that it would be permitted. Why, then, was the Scriptural intimation necessary?
^ᵃᶜnote:Abaye, who held that this intimation supported the view of R. Judah, evidently agrees with him.
^ᵃᵈnote:By the Torah proper, the Five Books of Moses, as against the Torah in general, the sum total of the Jewish law and tradition. Prohibitions of the Torah are more serious, hence even unintended transgression remains forbidden.
^ᵃᵉnote:The prohibition dealt with here.
^ᵃᶠnote:The first immersion, on top of the Water Gate, took place on profane ground; this, however, had to be performed on holy ground, as part of the service of the Day of Atonement.
^ᵃᵍnote:The four garments prescribed for the special service of the Day of Atonement: the tunic, the breeches, the girdle and the mitre, Lev. XVI, 4.
^ᵃʰnote:One mina is worth about £ 3.
^ᵃⁱnote:As long as one spends more for the morning garments than for the evening garments, there is no regulation to enforce the exact sum mentioned in the Mishnah. V. infra. The evening garment was put on by the high priest for the sole purpose of removing spoon and coal-pan from the Holy of Holies, whereas the rest of the special service of the Day of Atonement was performed by him in the morning garment, hence it has to be the better of the two.
^ᵃʲnote:Var. lec.: So much he received from the Temple treasury. V. Bah.