Torah Community Connections

Week 30 - Tuesday - 20 June 2000

YOMA: CHAPTER 3 : MISHNA 7

In the morning he puts on Pelusin of twelve maneh, and afternoon, Hindvin of eight hundred zuz; so Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, in the morning he put on of eighteen maneh, and in the afternoon of twelve maneh, in all thirty maneh. These are from the congregation, and if he wanted to add, he added from his own.

Kehati

This mishnah deals with the nature and value of the white garments in which the High Priest performed the special service for Yom Kippur. The mishnah teaches that in the afternoon service the High Priest wore white garments which were of lesser value than the white garments that he wore for the morning service.

In the morning - for the morning service, he - the High Priest, put on Pelusin - white garments made of fine, excellent linen which came from the city of Pelusium in Egypt; according to one opinion, Pelusium is identical with Ramses: Targum Yerushalmi translates "Ramses" as "Pelusin," of - worth - twelve maneh - one maneh = 100 dinars; and for the afternoon service, Hindvin - white linen garments from India (see Tosefot Yom Tov), of eight hundred zuz - eight maneh;

So Rabbi Meir - who holds that the total amount of money expended from Temple funds on the garments of the High Priest is twenty maneh. But the Sages say, in the morning he put on of eighteen maneh, and in the afternoon of twelve maneh, in all thirty maneh - the Gemara explains that the Sages stated the total ("in all thirty maneh") in order to teach that within this budgetary limit it is also permitted to reduce the morning garments and to increase the afternoon garments; at any rate, all agree that the morning garments must be better and dearer than those of the afternoon. The Gemara explains that this is learned from a passage in the Torah: "He shall put on the holy linen tunic, and he shall have the linen breeches upon his flesh, and shall be girded with the linen girdle, and with the linen mitre shall he be attired" (Lev. 16:4) - the word "linen" is mentioned four times, to teach that the garments shall be from the choicest fabric; and since this passage refers to the morning service, we learn that during the morning he wears finer garments than in the afternoon.

The Tosafists explain that the first "linen" teaches the basic law, that the garments should be of linen; the second "linen" [bad] implies this as levad, (alone), i.e., he wears only these, and not together with the gold garments, as all the other days of the year; the third "linen" implies that it be of choicer fabric than that worn all the other days; and the fourth "linen" - that the morning linen is superior to that of the evening.

These - thirty maneh according to the opinion of the Sages, or twenty maneh, according to Rabbi Meir, are - he takes, from the congregation - i.e., from the Temple treasury, in order to purchase the garments, and if he - the High Priest, wanted to add - and purchase more costly garments, he added from his own - money, provided that he gives the additional amount as a present to the Temple treasury (Gemara).

We have interpreted the mishnah as do most commentators, as referring to all four of the white garments. Rambam, however, writes: "The white garments are the four in which the High Priest serves on Yom Kippur...and they are from pure linen. And the High Priest has two other tunics, one he puts on in the morning, and one in the afternoon. And the two are together thirty maneh from the Temple treasury" (Hil. Kelei ha-Kodesh 5:3; see Mishneh Lemelekh, op. Cit.). Rambam also writes: "The white garments in which he (the High Priest) serves on the fast day, he may never use again and they are hidden away in the place where he takes them off...and it is prohibited to derive benefit from them" (ibid., halakhah 5). This law is brought in a baraita in the Gemara (Yoma 24a). It is learned from the passage in the Torah, "and shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place, and shall leave them there" (Lev. 16:23): "and shall leave them there" teaches that they require hiding. According to another opinion, they are fit for use by a common priest, and the passage "and shall leave them there" teaches that the High Priest may not use them on another Yom Kippur.

YOMA: CHAPTER 3 : MISHNA 8

He came to his bullock, and his bullock was standing between the Ulam and the Altar, its head to the south and its face to the west; and the priest stands in the east and his face is to the west, and places his two hands on it and he makes confession. And thus he would say: "O, Hashem, I have done wrong, I have transgressed, I have sinned before You, I and my house. O, the Name, forgive the wrongdoings, and the transgressions, and the sins, that I have done wrong, and that I have transgressed, and that I have sinned before You, I and my house, as it is written in the Torah of Moses your servant, 'For on this day shall atonement be made for you...' (Lev. 16:30)." And they answered after him, "Blessed be the Name of the glory of His kingdom for ever and ever."

Kehati

He came to his bullock - the Torah passage regarding the Yom Kippur service reads, "With this shall Aaron come into the holy place: with a young bullock for a sin-offering" (Lev. 16:3), and the bullock had to be from his own money, to atone for him and for his house (ibid., v. 6); Thus, the mishnah teaches that after the High Priest put on the white garments he begins the day's service, "and he came to his bullock," and his bullock was standing - in the north of the Temple Courtyard, between the Ulam - hall leading to the interior of the Temple - and the Altar - close to the Heikhal (interior of the Temple) (see Tosefot Yom Tov on the following mishnah). The Gemara explains that he made it stand in this place out of consideration for the High Priest, for he had to carry in his hand a bowl full of blood to the Holy of Holies, to sprinkle the blood inside the Temple. They therefore shortened his way as much as possible, taking care that the bullock was in a place fit for slaughtering, i.e., on the north side of the Temple Courtyard, its - the bullock's, Head to the south and its face to the west - they twisted its face to the west, towards the Sanctuary.

The Gemara explains that they did not position it with its head facing straight west and its rear towards the east (towards the Altar), because they feared "lest it scatter dung," and it would be disgraceful for its secretory channel to be visible to the east. They therefore positioned it with its head towards the south and its rear towards the north, and they twisted its head so it would be facing the west, in the direction of the Heikhal; and the High priest stands in the east - with his back to the east, in the direction of the Altar, and his face is to the west - in the direction of the Heikhal, and places his two hands on it - on the bullock, between its two horns, and he makes confession - as it is written, "And Aaron shall offer the bullock of the hatat, which is for himself, and make atonement for himself and for his house" (Lev. 16:6). An oral tradition teaches that atonement by words is meant, i.e., the confession; since the bullock has not yet been slaughtered, the passage cannot refer to atonement by blood (Gemara).

And thus he would say - "O, Hashem - Lit. 'the Name.' The High Priest would pronounce the Tetragrammaton as it is written; this is why the Tanna used the expression, 'the Name,' I have done wrong, I have transgressed, I have sinned before You, I and my house. O, the Name, forgive the wrongdoings, and the transgressions, and the sins, that I have done wrong, and that I have transgressed, and that I have sinned before You, I and my house, as it is written in the Torah of Moses your servant, 'For on this day shall atonement be made for you...'" - the High Priest would recite the entire verse "For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall you be clean before the Lord", and here, too, he would pronounce the Tetragrammaton, as it is written. It follows that the High Priest mentioned the Tetragrammaton three times during his confession.

And they - the priests and the people who were in the Temple Inner Court, when they heard the Tetragrammaton pronounced - answered after him, "Blessed be the Name of the glory of His kingdom for ever and ever" - as it is written, "For I will proclaim the name of the Lord, ascribe greatness to our God" (Deut. 32:3): Moses said to Israel, When I mention the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, you ascribe greatness to our God (Gemara).

Regarding the wording, "I have done wrong [aviti], I have transgressed [pashati], I have sinned [hatati]," the Gemara quotes a baraita: "How does he confess? 'I have done wrong, I have transgressed, I have sinned'; and similarly, for the scapegoat it says, 'and confess over him all the iniquities [avonot] of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, in all their sins' (Lev. 16:21) - first "iniquities," followed by "transgressions," followed by "sins." God, too, said to Moses, 'forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin' (Ex. 34:7); so Rabbi Meir. But the Sages say, 'Iniquities' - are the intentional wrongdoings, and it is written, 'that soul shall utterly be cut off, his iniquity shall be upon him' (Num. 15:31); 'transgressions' are the rebels (who sin to anger God - Rashi), as it is written, 'The king of Moab has rebelled [pasha] against me' (II K. 8:22) (the people of Libnah revolted against the king of Judea); 'all their sins' - these are the unintentional misdeeds, and it is written, 'If any one shall sin through error' (Lev. 4:2) - should he, after having confessed the intentional and rebellious acts, turn back and confess the unintentional acts? Rather, he confessed as follows: 'I have sinned, and I have done wrong, and I have transgressed, I and my house...' David, too, says, 'We have sinned with our fathers, we have done iniquitously, we have dealt wickedly [hirshanu]' (Ps. 106:6). If so, why does Moses say, 'forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin'? Moses said before the Holy One, blessed be He, 'Master of the Universe, when Israel sins before You and they repent, account their intentional deeds as unintentional errors.' Rabbah bar Shemuel said, in the name of Rav: the law follows the opinion of the Sages." Thus, also Rambam (on mishnah 4:2): "The correct order is to confess the minor infractions, and afterwards the serious ones, and therefore the order of the confession for the individual is as that for the congregation: 'We have sinned, we have done wrong, we have transgressed." It follows from this that the current mishnah (as well as 4:2 and 6:2, below) follows Rabbi Meir. The law, however, does not follow him, but the Sages cited in the baraita quoted above.

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives