Yoma 28aיומא כ״ח א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Yoma 28a'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
28aכ״ח א

והרי אברים ופדרים סוף עבודה דיממא היא והרי תרומת הדשן תחילת עבודה דיממא היא דא"ר יוחנן קדש ידיו לתרומת הדשן למחר אינו צריך לקדש שכבר קדש מתחלת עבודה אלא קשיא

The Gemara expresses wonder at Rabbi Zeira’s equation of these two issues: But isn’t there the burning of the limbs and the fats? The Gemara answers: That is not difficult, because the burning of the limbs and the fats is the end of the daytime service. The Gemara asks further: But isn’t there the removal of the ashes? The Gemara rejects that argument: Removing the ashes is the start of the daytime service, as Rabbi Yoḥanan said: If a priest sanctified his hands at night by washing them for the removal of the ashes, the next day, i.e., after daybreak, he need not sanctify his hands again, as he already sanctified them at the start of the service. Rabbi Zeira’s equation between services that are incomplete by themselves and services for which a non-priest does not incur the death penalty therefore remains intact. If so, the question that he asked concerning Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement remains difficult.

אלא אי אתמר הכי אתמר א"ר אסי א"ר יוחנן זר שסידר שני גזירי עצים חייב הואיל ועבודה תמה היא

Rather, Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement must be revised, and one must posit that when it was stated, this is how it was stated: Rabbi Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: A non-priest who arranges the two logs is liable to receive the death penalty, since it is a service that is complete, i.e., it is not followed and completed by a subsequent service. Although the burning of the limbs upon the altar follows the placement of the logs, that is considered to be an independent act, not the completion of the service of placing the logs. This is because the placing of the logs is done while still night, while the burning of the limbs cannot be done until daybreak.

מתקיף לה רבא אלא מעתה תבעי פייס ולא בעיא פייס והתניא מי שזכה בתרומת הדשן יזכה בסידור שני גזירי עצים

Rava strongly objects to this: However, if that is so, the service of placing the two logs should require a lottery. The Gemara expresses surprise at Rava’s comment: And doesn’t it require a lottery? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: Whoever was privileged to perform the removal of the ashes is also privileged to perform the arrangement of the two logs? There was in fact a lottery for arranging the two logs.

ה"ק יפייסו לה בפני עצמה כדאמרינן

Rather, this is what Rava actually said: If placing the logs is considered a complete service and is therefore a task important enough to warrant the death penalty for a non-priest who performs it, they should hold a separate lottery for it by itself. The Gemara answers: It is as we said at the beginning of the chapter, that the task of placing the logs was added to the lottery for the removal of ashes as an incentive for the priests to rise before dawn (Rabbeinu Ḥananel).

למימרא דעבודה תמה וזר חייב עליה מיתה בעיא פייס אין זר חייב עליה מיתה לא בעיא פייס והרי שחיטה שאני שחיטה דתחילת עבודה דיממא היא

Based on Rava’s comments, the Gemara asks: Is that to say that any service that is a complete service and for which a non-priest would be liable to receive the death penalty requires a lottery, but if a non-priest would not be liable to receive the death penalty it would not require a lottery? But isn’t there slaughtering, which may be performed by non-priest and yet requires a lottery? The Gemara rejects this point: Slaughtering is different, because it is the beginning of the daytime service, which gives it added importance.

למימרא דעבודה תמה בעי פייס עבודה שיש אחריה עבודה לא בעי פייס והרי אברים ופדרים סוף עבודה דיממא היא הרי תרומת הדשן משום מעשה שהיה

The Gemara asks further on Rava’s statement: Is that to say that a service that is complete requires a lottery, whereas a service which is followed by a subsequent service that completes it does not require a lottery? But isn’t there the burning of the limbs and the fats? The Gemara answers: That is not difficult because the burning of the limbs and the fats is the end of the daytime service. The Gemara asks: Isn’t there the removal of the ashes? The Gemara answers: A lottery was established for that service only due to the incident that occurred when the priests came to danger.

אמר מר זוטרא ואיתימא רב אשי אף אנן נמי תנינא אמר להם הממונה צאו וראו אם הגיע זמן השחיטה ואילו זמן סידור גזירי עצים לא קתני

As explained above, the reason Rabbi Yoḥanan holds that the arrangement of the logs is a complete service, and is not considered a prelude to the burning of limbs, is because the former is a nighttime service and the latter is a daytime service. Mar Zutra, and some say Rav Ashi, said: We too have learned in a mishna that the arrangement of the two logs is a nighttime service. As we learned: The appointed priest said to them: Go out and see if the time for slaughtering has arrived, whereas the mishna did not teach: See whether the time for arranging the two logs has arrived. This shows that arranging the logs may be done while it is still night; it is therefore not considered to be connected to, and complemented by, the placing of the limbs the following day.

הך דלית לה תקנתא קתני הך דאית לה תקנתא לא קתני

The Gemara rejects this proof: The reason the mishna mentions slaughtering is that it prefers to teach this statement with regard to that which has no rectification if it is done at night, such as slaughtering the offering, which is rendered irreparably invalid if performed before daybreak. It does not want to teach it with regard to something that has rectification if done at night, such as arranging the two logs, which can always be removed and replaced properly. However, it is possible that the proper time for arranging the logs is daytime, and therefore it may be regarded as a service that is completed by the subsequent burning of limbs on the altar.

הדרן עלך בראשונה

מתני׳ אמר להם הממונה צאו וראו אם הגיע זמן השחיטה אם הגיע הרואה אומר ברקאי מתיא בן שמואל אומר האיר פני כל המזרח עד שבחברון והוא אומר הן ולמה הוצרכו לכך שפעם אחת עלה מאור הלבנה ודימו שהאיר מזרח ושחטו את התמיד והוציאוהו לבית השריפה

MISHNA: The appointed priest said to the other priests: Go out and observe if it is day and the time for slaughter has arrived. If the time has arrived, the observer says: There is light [barkai]. Matya ben Shmuel says that the appointed priest phrased his question differently: Is the entire eastern sky illuminated even to Hebron? And the observer says: Yes. And why did they need to ascertain whether or not it is day, which is typically evident to all? It was necessary, as once, the light of the moon rose, and they imagined that the eastern sky was illuminated with sunlight, and they slaughtered the daily offering before its appropriate time. The animal was later taken out to the place designated for burning and burned because it was slaughtered too early. In order to prevent similar errors in the future, the Sages instituted that they would carefully assess the situation until they were certain that it was day.

הורידו כ"ג לבית הטבילה זה הכלל היה במקדש כל המיסך את רגליו טעון טבילה וכל המטיל מים טעון קידוש ידים ורגלים

After the priests announced the start of the day, they led the High Priest down to the Hall of Immersion. The Gemara comments: This was the principle in the Temple: Anyone who covers his legs, a euphemism for defecating, requires immersion afterward; and anyone who urinates requires sanctification of the hands and feet with water from the basin afterward.