Zevachim 19bזבחים י״ט ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
19bי״ט ב

ששם מניחין תפילין:

it was there that the High Priests would don their phylacteries. Consequently, the phylacteries of the head did not interpose between the mitre and the priest’s head.

מחוסר כיפורים מנלן אמר רב הונא אמר קרא (ויקרא יב, ח) וכפר עליה הכהן וטהרה טהרה מכלל שהיא טמאה:

§ The mishna teaches that rites performed by one who has not yet brought an atonement offering to complete the purification process are disqualified. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Rav Huna says: The verse states with regard to the offering brought by a woman who has given birth: “And the priest shall make atonement for her, and she shall be pure” (Leviticus 12:8). Since the verse states: “And she shall be pure,” one learns by inference that she is ritually impure to some extent until she brings her offering, even though she has already immersed. Anyone who has not yet brought an atonement offering is likewise impure to some extent, and rites performed by one who is impure are disqualified (see 17a).

ושלא רחוץ ידים ורגלים: אתיא חוקה חוקה ממחוסר בגדים:

§ The mishna teaches that rites performed by one whose hands and feet are not washed are disqualified. The Gemara explains: This halakha is derived by verbal analogy between “statute” mentioned in this context and “statute” from the case of one lacking the requisite vestments, whose rites are disqualified (see 17b).

ת"ר כהן גדול שלא טבל ושלא קידש בין בגד לבגד ובין עבודה לעבודה ועבד עבודתו כשרה ואחד כהן גדול ואחד כהן הדיוט שלא קידש ידיו ורגליו שחרית ועבד עבודתו פסולה

The Sages taught: With regard to a High Priest who did not immerse or did not sanctify his hands and feet during the Yom Kippur service between donning the golden garments and the white linen garments, or between performance of one rite and another rite, and he performed the service in this state, his service is valid after the fact. But with regard to either a High Priest or an ordinary priest who did not sanctify his hands and feet at all in the morning and performed the service, his service is disqualified.

א"ל רב אסי לרבי יוחנן מכדי חמש טבילות ועשרה קדושין דאורייתא וחוקה כתיב בהו ליעכבו

Rav Asi said to Rabbi Yoḥanan: Now, there are five immersions and ten sanctifications of the hands and feet during the Yom Kippur service by Torah law, and the word: “Statute” (Leviti-cus 16:34), is written with regard to them. Accordingly, they should be indispensable and should disqualify the service if not performed.

א"ל אמר קרא (ויקרא טז, ד) ולבשם לבישה מעכבת ואין דבר אחר מעכב

Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: After stipulating that the High Priest must wear the requisite vestments before performing the Yom Kippur service, the verse states: “And put them on” (Leviticus 16:4). This superfluous term serves to indicate that wearing the requisite vestments is indispensable, but nothing else is indispensable.

צהבו פניו אמר ליה וי"ו אאופתא כתבי לך אי הכי דצפרא נמי

Rav Asi’s face lit up with joy after hearing this response. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: I have merely written the letter vav on a piece of wood for you, i.e., I have not given you a satisfactory answer. As, if that is so, that only the wearing of the vestments is indispensable, then failure to sanctify the hands and feet in the morning should also not disqualify the service, yet according to the baraita it disqualifies the service.

אמר חזקיה אמר קרא (שמות ל, כא) והיתה להם חק עולם לו ולזרעו לדורותם דבר המעכב בזרעו מעכב בו דבר שאינו מעכב בזרעו אין מעכב בו

Ḥizkiyya says there is an alternative answer: The verse states with regard to sanctification of the hands and feet: “And it shall be a statute forever to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations” (Exodus 30:21). From the comparison of Aaron to his children one may derive that anything that is indispensable with regard to his seed, the priests, is indispensable with regard to him, the High Priest during the Yom Kippur service, which only he may perform. But anything that is not indispensable with regard to his seed is not indispensable with regard to him. Therefore, the sanctification of the hands and feet between each rite, which is unnecessary for priests during the daily service, does not disqualify the High Priest’s Yom Kippur service if not done.

רבי יונתן אמר מהכא (שמות מ, לא) ורחצו ממנו משה ואהרן ובניו דבר המעכב בבניו מעכב בו דבר שאינו מעכב בבניו אין מעכב בו

Rabbi Yonatan says: The principle is derived from here: The verse states with regard to the Basin in the Temple: “That Moses and Aaron and his sons might wash their hands and their feet from it” (Exodus 40:31). One may derive from the verse that anything that is indispensable with regard to his sons is indispensable with regard to him. But anything that is not indispensable with regard to his sons is not indispensable with regard to him.

רבי יונתן מ"ט לא אמר מדחזקיה אמר לך ההוא לדורות הוא דכתיב

The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Rabbi Yonatan did not say to derive this from the verse cited by Ḥizkiyya? The Gemara responds: Rabbi Yonatan could have said to you: That verse cited by Ḥizkiyya is written to teach that the halakha applies even for future generations, not to draw a parallel between the High Priest and ordinary priests.

ואידך מ"ט לא אמר מהאי מיבעי ליה לכדרבי יוסי ברבי חנינא דאמר רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא כל כיור שאין בו כדי לקדש ארבעה כהנים ממנו אין מקדשין בו שנאמר ורחצו ממנו משה ואהרן ובניו:

The Gemara asks: And the other Sage, Ḥizkiyya, what is the reason that he did not say to derive the halakha from that verse cited by Rabbi Yonatan? The Gemara responds: He requires that verse for the halakha taught by Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina. As Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: With regard to any circumstance in which the Basin does not contain enough water for four priests to sanctify their hands and feet from it, the priests may not sanctify their hands and feet with it, as it is stated: “That Moses and Aaron and his sons might wash their hands and their feet from it.” Moses, Aaron, and Aaron’s two sons total four.

ת"ר כיצד מצות קידוש מניח ידו הימנית על גבי רגלו הימנית וידו השמאלית על גבי רגלו השמאלית ומקדש רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה אומר מניח שתי ידיו זו על גב זו ועל גבי שתי רגליו זו על גבי זו ומקדש אמרו לו הפלגתה אי אפשר לעשות כן

§ The Sages taught: How is the mitzva of sanctification of the hands and feet performed? The priest lays his right hand on top of his right foot, and his left hand on top of his left foot, and sanctifies them with the water flowing from the Basin. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: He lays both his hands one on top of the other, and lays them together on top of both his feet, themselves laid one on top of the other, and sanctifies them. They said to him: You have gone too far; it is impossible to do so.

שפיר קאמרי ליה אמר רב יוסף וחבירו מסייעו

The Gemara notes: They speak well to him; it seems impossible to assume such a position without losing one’s balance. Rav Yosef says: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, meant that the priest would assume the position while another priest would help him maintain his balance.

מאי בינייהו אמר אביי עמידה מן הצד איכא בינייהו

The Gemara asks: What is the difference between the reasoning of the Sages and that of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda? Abaye says: The difference between them is their opinion with regard to standing with support from the side. According to the Sages, this is not considered standing and the priest may not sanctify his hands and feet while in such a position.

א"ל רב סמא בריה דרב אשי לרבינא וליתיב מיתב ולקדש אמר קרא (שמות ל, כ) לשרת ושירות מעומד הוא:

Rav Samma, son of Rav Ashi, said to Ravina: And let him sit and sanctify his hands and feet while seated, and in this manner he may sanctify them all at once. Ravina said to him: The verse states: “When they go into the Tent of Meeting, they shall wash with water, that they not die; or when they come near to the altar to minister” (Exodus 30:20), and ministration is performed while standing, as the verse states: “To stand to minister” (Deuteronomy 18:5). Therefore, sanctification must also be performed while standing.

ת"ר קידש ידיו ורגליו ביום אין צריך לקדש בלילה בלילה צריך לקדש ביום דברי רבי שהיה רבי אומר לינה מועלת בקידוש ידים ורגלים רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אומר אין לינה מועלת בקידוש ידים ורגלים

§ The Sages taught: If a priest sanctified his hands and feet during the day, he does not need to sanctify them that night, but if he sanctified them at night, he must sanctify them during the following day. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would say: The disqualification of being left overnight is determinative with regard to sanctification of the hands and feet, like any sacrificial item that is sanctified. Accordingly, once night has passed, the priest must sanctify them again. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: The disqualification of being left overnight is not determinative with regard to sanctification of the hands and feet. Therefore, as long as the priest continues to serve, he need not sanctify them again.

תניא אידך היה עומד ומקריב על גבי מזבח כל הלילה לאורה טעון קידוש ידים ורגלים דברי רבי רבי אלעזר בר"ש אומר כיון שקידש ידיו ורגליו מתחילת עבודה אפילו מיכן ועד עשרה ימים אינו צריך לקדש

It is taught in another baraita: If the priest was standing and sacrificing offerings on top of the altar all night, in the morning he requires sanctification of the hands and feet again. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: Once he sanctified his hands and feet at the beginning of the service, even if he continues to perform rites for the next ten days, he does not need to sanctify them again.

וצריכא דאי אשמעינן קמייתא בההיא קאמר רבי דפסק ליה מעבודה לעבודה אבל בהא דלא פסק ליה אימא מודי ליה רבי לרבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון ואי אשמעינן בהא בהא קאמר רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אבל בהא אימא מודי ליה לרבי צריכא

The Gemara notes: And both of the above baraitot are necessary, though they seem to present the same dispute. As, if it had taught us only the first baraita, one might have thought that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi stated his opinion only with regard to that case, as there the priest paused between one rite and another rite. But in this case, i.e., the second baraita, where he did not pause between rites, say that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi concedes to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, that the priest need not sanctify his hands and feet again. And conversely, if it had taught us only with regard to that case, i.e., the second baraita, one might have thought: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, stated his opinion only in that case. But in this case, say that he concedes to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Therefore, both baraitot are necessary.

מאי טעמא דרבי דכתיב (שמות ל, כ) בגשתם מ"ט דרבי אלעזר בר"ש דכתיב (שמות ל, כ) בבואם

The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? As it is written: The priests must sanctify their hands and feet: “When they come near to the altar to minister” (Exodus 30:20), i.e., when they begin the service in the morning. And what is the reasoning of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon? As it is written in the same verse: “When they go into the Tent of Meeting,” indicating that one sanctification suffices for the duration of a priest’s service in the Tent of Meeting.

ואידך נמי הא כתיב בבואם אי כתיב בגשתם ולא כתיב בבואם הוה אמינא על כל גישה וגישה כתב רחמנא בבואם

The Gemara asks: But according to the other Sage, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as well, isn’t it written: “When they go into the Tent of Meeting”? How does he interpret this term? The Gemara responds: If only “when they come near” had been written, and “when they go into” had not been written, I would say that the priest must sanctify his hands and feet for each and every approach, i.e., every rite. Therefore the Merciful One wrote: “When they go into,” to indicate that it is necessary only once a day.

ואידך נמי הא כתיב בגשתם אי כתיב בבואם ולא כתיב בגשתם הוה אמינא אפילו אביאה ריקנית

The Gemara asks: But according to the other Sage, Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, as well, isn’t it written: “When they come near”? How does he interpret this term? The Gemara responds: If only “when they go into” had been written, and “when they come near” had not been written, I would say that even for an entrance with no purpose, i.e., where the priest has no intention of performing rites, he must sanctify his hands and feet. Therefore, the Merciful One wrote: “When they come near.”

אביאה ריקנית הא כתיב לשרת אלא בגשתם מיבעי ליה לכדרב אחא בר יעקב דאמר רב אחא בר יעקב הכל מודים בקידוש שני כשהוא לבוש מקדש דאמר קרא או בגשתם מי שאינו מחוסר אלא גישה בלבד יצא זה שמחוסר לבישה וגישה

The Gemara rejects this: How could one have thought that the priest must sanctify his hands and feet for an entrance with no purpose? Isn’t is written in the same verse: “To minister”? Rather, according to Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, “when they come near” is necessary for the halakha taught by Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov. As Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov says: All concede with regard to the second sanctification performed by the High Priest on Yom Kippur after each immersion that he must sanctify his hands and feet while he is dressed in the priestly vestments, as the verse states: “Or when they come near to the altar to minister.” The verse indicates that one who is lacking only to come near to the altar, i.e., one who is in all other ways prepared for the service, may perform this sanctification. Excluded is this one, who is lacking both dressing and coming near.

(שמות ל, כ) להקטיר אשה למה לי

The Gemara asks: Why do I need the continuation of the verse: “To cause an offering by fire to smoke”?