עֲבוֹדָתוֹ מְחַנַּכְתּוֹ. מִי לָא תַּנְיָא כׇּל הַכֵּלִים שֶׁעָשָׂה מֹשֶׁה — מְשִׁיחָתָן מְקַדַּשְׁתָּן, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ — עֲבוֹדָתָן מְחַנַּכְתָּן. הָכָא נָמֵי — עֲבוֹדָתוֹ מְחַנַּכְתּוֹ. That action is unnecessary and therefore superfluous; his service initiates him. The replacement High Priest need not undergo any preliminary initiation. His very performance of the Yom Kippur service, which is valid only if performed by the High Priest, initiates him as acting High Priest. As proof, the Gemara states: Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: With regard to all the sacred vessels that Moses made, their anointment with oil consecrates them. From that point forward, in the generations after Moses, new vessels did not require anointment to be consecrated; rather, their use in Temple service initiates them and renders them fit for use. Here, too, with regard to the High Priest, his service initiates him.
כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר: אַבְנֵטוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, רַבִּי וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, חַד אָמַר: שֶׁל כִּלְאַיִם, וְחַד אָמַר: שֶׁל בּוּץ. § Apropos the belt of the High Priest, the Gemara cites the aforementioned dispute in its entirety. When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he said: With regard to the belt of the common priest, there is a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon. One said: It was a mixture of diverse kinds of wool and linen, like the belt of the High Priest mentioned in the Torah. And one said: It was made of fine linen, like the rest of the garments of the common priest.
תִּסְתַּיֵּים דְּרַבִּי הוּא דְּאָמַר שֶׁל כִּלְאַיִם. דְּתַנְיָא: אֵין בֵּין כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט אֶלָּא אַבְנֵט, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אַף לֹא אַבְנֵט. אֵימַת? אִי נֵימָא בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה — טוּבָא אִיכָּא: כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל מְשַׁמֵּשׁ בִּשְׁמוֹנָה וְהֶדְיוֹט בְּאַרְבָּעָה! The Gemara suggests: Conclude that it is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi who said that the belt of the common priest was a mixture of diverse kinds, as it was taught in a baraita: The only difference between a High Priest and a common priest is the belt; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: Not even the belt represents a difference between them. The Gemara explains: With regard to the difference between the High Priest and the common priest, when is there a dispute between the tanna’im? If we say that the dispute is with regard to the rest of the days of the year, there are many other differences between them, since the High Priest serves wearing eight garments and the common priest wears four garments. Therefore, that could not be the point of the dispute.
אֶלָּא לָאו, בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. Rather, is it not that the dispute is with regard to the differences between the High Priest and the common priest on Yom Kippur? They agree that the belt of the High Priest on Yom Kippur is made of linen, but disagree with regard to the common priest’s belt. According to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who says that there is a difference between the belts, the belt of the common priest must be made of a mixture of diverse kinds. According to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, who says that there is no difference between their belts, the belt of the common priest must be made of linen, like that of the High Priest on Yom Kippur.
אָמְרִי: לָא, לְעוֹלָם בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה, וּבְהָנָךְ דְּשָׁוִין. The Gemara rejects this proof. The Sages say: No, this is not a proof, as actually, the dispute is with regard to the differences during the rest of the days of the year. However, the dispute is not with regard to all the differences between the High Priest and the common priest, but rather only with regard to those four garments common to both priests: The tunic, trousers, turban, and belt. Based on this understanding that the dispute is with regard to the rest of the year, the analysis of the dispute is reversed: According to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi the belt of the High Priest is a mixture of diverse kinds and that of the common priest is made of linen, while according to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, the belt of the common priest is a mixture of diverse kinds. Therefore, there is no definitive proof from the baraita.
כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין, אָמַר: אַבְנֵטוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל שֶׁל בּוּץ. בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל שֶׁל כִּלְאַיִם. לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא בְּאַבְנֵטוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט בֵּין בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה, בֵּין בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. שֶׁרַבִּי אוֹמֵר: שֶׁל כִּלְאַיִם, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: שֶׁל בּוּץ. When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he stated this tradition in a clearer fashion: With regard to the belt of the High Priest on Yom Kippur, everyone agrees that it is made of fine linen, as stated in the Torah. With regard to the belt of the High Priest during the rest of the days of the year, everyone agrees that it is a mixture of diverse kinds. They disagreed only with regard to the belt of the common priest both during the rest of the days of the year and on Yom Kippur, as Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It was a mixture of diverse kinds, and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says it was made of linen.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: ״עַל בְּשָׂרוֹ״, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״יִלְבַּשׁ״? לְהָבִיא מִצְנֶפֶת וְאַבְנֵט לַהֲרָמַת הַדֶּשֶׁן, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: We, too, have learned in a baraita: The Torah says with regard to the removal of the ashes from the altar: “And the priest shall put on his linen garment, and his linen trousers shall he put upon his flesh” (Leviticus 6:3). The baraita questions the formulation of the verse. Since at the beginning of the verse it is written: “And the priest shall put on,” for what purpose does the verse state: “Shall he put upon,” in the latter part of the verse? Rabbi Yehuda says: It comes to include donning the mitre and the belt for the removal of the ashes, even though it is not explicitly stated in the verse. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.
רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: לְהָבִיא בִּגְדֵי כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, שֶׁהֵן כְּשֵׁרִין לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: שְׁתֵּי תְשׁוּבוֹת בַּדָּבָר. חֲדָא: דְּאַבְנֵטוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים לֹא זֶה הוּא אַבְנֵטוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. Rabbi Dosa says that the term: Shall put on, comes to include the halakha that the garments of the High Priest on Yom Kippur are fit for a common priest. During the Yom Kippur service, the High Priest wears just four linen garments. Although he may not serve in those garments on Yom Kippur the following year, a common priest may serve in them during the rest of the year. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: There are two responses to reject this statement of Rabbi Dosa. One: The belt of the High Priest on Yom Kippur is not the same as the belt of the common priest during the rest of the year. Clearly, according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, the belt of the High Priest on Yom Kippur is made of linen, and that of the common priest during the year is a mixture of the diverse kinds of wool and linen.
וְעוֹד: בְּגָדִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמַּשְׁתָּה בָּהֶן קְדוּשָּׁה חֲמוּרָה, תְּשַׁמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן קְדוּשָּׁה קַלָּה? אֶלָּא מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״יִלְבַּשׁ״? לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַשְּׁחָקִין. And furthermore, there is another reason to reject the statement of Rabbi Dosa. Could it be that with regard to garments that were used by the High Priest to perform a service of extreme sanctity, the common priest will use them to perform a service of minor sanctity? Rather, according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, for what purpose does the verse state the phrase: Shall put on? It comes to include threadbare garments and to teach that as long as they are not completely tattered, they may be worn for that service.
וְאַזְדָּא רַבִּי דּוֹסָא לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְהִנִּיחָם שָׁם״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁטְּעוּנִין גְּנִיזָה. רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים אַחֵר. And Rabbi Dosa follows his line of reasoning, as it was taught in a baraita: That which is written: “And Aaron shall come into the Tent of Meeting, and shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into the Sanctuary, and shall leave them there” (Leviticus 16:23), teaches that the garments worn by the High Priest on Yom Kippur require interment and may not be put to additional use. Rabbi Dosa says: It means only that the High Priest may not use them on Yom Kippur in a different year. According to Rabbi Dosa, they may be worn by a common priest during his service, as they do not require interment.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵירַע בּוֹ פְּסוּל וּמִינּוּ אַחֵר תַּחְתָּיו, רִאשׁוֹן — חוֹזֵר לַעֲבוֹדָתוֹ, שֵׁנִי — כׇּל מִצְוֹת כְּהוּנָּה גְּדוֹלָה עָלָיו, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. § The Gemara returns to the initiation of the acting High Priest. The Sages taught in the Tosefta: If a disqualification befalls the High Priest and they appointed another in his stead, and then the cause of the disqualification of the High Priest is resolved, e.g., he was purified from impurity, the original High Priest returns to his service. With regard to the second, acting High Priest, all the mitzvot of the High Priesthood are incumbent upon him. He serves wearing eight garments and it is prohibited for him to let his hair grow, to rend his garments in mourning the death of a relative, to subject himself to impurity imparted by the corpse of a relative, or to marry a widow. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: רִאשׁוֹן — חוֹזֵר לַעֲבוֹדָתוֹ, שֵׁנִי — אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לֹא לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְלֹא לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, Rabbi Yosei says: The original priest returns to his service, while the second is fit to serve neither as High Priest with eight garments, because there is a different High Priest; nor as a common priest with four garments, as once he was elevated to a state of extreme sanctity he may not be reduced to a state of minor sanctity.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּיוֹסֵף בֶּן אִלֵּם בְּצִיפּוֹרִי שֶׁאֵירַע בּוֹ פְּסוּל בְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וּמִינּוּהוּ תַּחְתָּיו, וְאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: רִאשׁוֹן — חוֹזֵר לַעֲבוֹדָתוֹ, שֵׁנִי — אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לֹא לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְלֹא לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל — מִשּׁוּם אֵיבָה. כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, מִשּׁוּם מַעֲלִין בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין. Rabbi Yosei said as proof for his opinion: There was an incident involving the priest Yosef ben Elem of Tzippori, who, when a reason for disqualification befell a High Priest, the priests appointed him in his stead. After the cause of the disqualification was resolved, the Sages said: The original High Priest returns to his service, while the second is fit to serve neither as High Priest nor as a common priest. The Gemara explains: Neither as a High Priest, due to hatred, jealousy and bitterness that would arise if there were two High Priests with equal standing in the Temple; nor as a common priest, because the principle is: One elevates to a higher level in matters of sanctity and one does not downgrade. Once he has served as a High Priest he cannot be restored to the position of a common priest.
אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: