Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

October 15, 2019 | 讟状讝 讘转砖专讬 转砖状驻

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Tamid 27

Where did the levites guard – how many were there? Did the priests really sleep with their clothes under their heads? Is there a problem of benefiting from the clothing or from shaatnez? IS it forbidden to wear them outside the temple – if so, in the story regarding the event that happened on Yom Har Grizim, when the Shomronim enlisted Alexander Mokdon to allow them to destroy the Temple, Shimon HaTzadik wore his priestly garments to go out to meet him and saved the Temple from being destroyed. A story is brought regarding Rav Safra who allowed Rabbi abba to enter the bathroom while he was in their. In light of the mishna (describing the lock on the bathroom), how could he have done that. Since there are germophobes, people should wask their cups before and after drinking, esp. a rabbi in case his student will want to not disrepect his rabbi by washing out his cup and will refrain from drikning (as happened once and the student dieed of thirst). From this story, a few laws are dervied regarding student/rabii relationships.

驻专讞讬 讻讛讜谞讛 讗诪专讬 讗讬谉 讛转诐 讚诇讗 诪讟讜 诇诪注讘讚 注讘讜讚讛 拽专讬 诇讛讜 专讜讘讬诐 讛讻讗 讚诪讟讜 诇讛讜 诇诪注讘讚 注讘讜讚讛 拽专讬 诇讛讜 驻专讞讬

the young men of the priesthood [pir岣i khehunna]? Is there a distinction between these different terms? The Sages say: Yes, there is a distinction. There, with regard to the priests who keep watch in the Chamber of Avtinas and in the Chamber of the Spark, the mishna is referring to priests who have not reached the age at which they are eligible to perform the Temple service, and therefore the tanna calls them young priests. The older priests would not keep watch, as they preferred to perform the Temple service. Here, with regard to the priests who sleep in the Chamber of the Hearth in order to be ready to perform the morning rites, the mishna is referring to priests who have reached the age at which they are eligible to perform the Temple service, and consequently the tanna calls them the young men of the priesthood.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讘砖诇砖讛 诪拽讜诪讜转 讛讻讛谞讬诐 砖讜诪专讬诐 讘讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讘讘讬转 讗讘讟讬谞住 讜讘讘讬转 讛谞讬爪讜抓 讜讘讘讬转 讛诪讜拽讚

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Middot 1:1): The priests would keep watch in three places in the Temple courtyard: In the Chamber of Avtinas, and in the Chamber of the Spark, and in the Chamber of the Hearth.

讜讛诇讜讬诐 讘注砖专讬诐 讜讗讞讚 诪拽讜诪讜转 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 讛专 讛讘讬转 讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪讘驻谞讬诐 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 注讝专讛 讜讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪讘讞讜抓 讗讞讚 讘诇砖讻转 讛拽专讘谉 讜讗讞讚 讘诇砖讻转 讛驻专讜讻转 讜讗讞讚 讗讞讜专讬 讘讬转 讛讻驻讜专转

And the Levites would keep watch in twenty-one places, as follows: Five upon the five gates of the Temple Mount; four upon the four corners of the Temple Mount, within the wall surrounding the Temple Mount; five upon the five gates of the Temple courtyard, and four upon the four corners of the Temple courtyard outside the courtyard wall, surrounding the Temple courtyard. One watch is observed in the Chamber of the Offering, where animals that had been checked for blemishes were held in readiness for sacrifice; one watch is kept in the Chamber of the Curtain, where the Curtain separating the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies was woven; and finally, one watch is kept behind the Chamber of the Ark Cover, in the area between the Holy of Holies and the western wall of the Temple Mount.

诪谞讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪住讜专讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 讚讻转讬讘 诇诪讝专讞 讛诇讜讬诐 砖砖讛 诇爪驻讜谞讛 诇讜讬诐 讗专讘注讛 诇谞讙讘讛 诇讜讬诐 讗专讘注讛 讜诇讗住驻讬诐 砖谞讬诐 砖谞讬诐 诇驻专讘专 诇诪注专讘 讗专讘注讛 诇诪住诇讛 砖谞讬诐 诇驻专讘专

With regard to these twenty-one places where the Levites keep watch, the Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Yehuda of Sura said, and some say that it was taught in a baraita: This is derived as it is written with regard to the Levites assigned by David to serve as gatekeepers upon the future construction of the Temple: Eastward were six Levites, northward four Levites, southward four Levites, and for the Asuppim two and two. For the Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at the Parbar (see I聽Chronicles 26:17鈥18).

讗诪专讬 讛谞讬 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讛讜讜 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 诇讗住驻讬诐 砖谞讬诐 (砖谞讬诐)

The Sages say that if these verses are the source for the twenty-one places in which the Levites keep watch, that is difficult, as these watches enumerated in the verse are twenty-four in total. Abaye said: This is what the verse is saying: 鈥淔or the Asuppim two,鈥 and they are always only two. It is not uncommon for a verse to repeat a word for emphasis in this manner, especially at the end of a verse.

讗讻转讬 注砖专讬谉 讜转专讬 讛讜讜 讛讬讗讱 讚驻专讘专 讞讚 讛讜讛 讜讗讞专讬谞讗 讘爪讜讜转讗 讛讜讗 讚讗讝讬诇 讜讬转讬讘 讙讘讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗讬 讗讘专讗讬

The Gemara objects: Even if two locations are removed from the list, according to the verse there are still twenty-two watches, rather than twenty-one. The Gemara explains: That watch, which was situated at the Parbar, was composed of only one watchman, and as for the other Levite mentioned in the verse, it was merely to serve as company that he went and sat with the watchman, due to the fact that the Parbar was situated on the outer side and was isolated from the other watches.

诪讗讬 诇驻专讘专 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 讻诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻诇驻讬 讘专

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the term 鈥渁t the Parbar [laParbar]鈥 (I聽Chronicles 26:18)? Rabba bar Rav Sheila said: This term is a contraction of two Aramaic words, and it is like one who says: Toward the outside [kelapei bar].

讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诇注讜诇诐 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讻讚讻转讬讘 转诇转讗 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讚讻讛谞讬诐 讜注砖专讬谉 讜讞讚 讚诇讜讬诐

The Gemara presents an alternative answer to the question with regard to the verse: And if you wish, say instead that actually there are twenty-four watches, and the verse may be interpreted literally as it is written. Three of them are the watches kept by the priests, and the remaining twenty-one are the watches kept by the Levites.

讜讛讗 讛讻讗 诇讜讬诐 讛讜讗 讚讻转讬讘 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讘注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 诪拽讜诪讜转 谞拽专讗讜 讻讛谞讬诐 诇讜讬诐 讜讝讛 讗讞讚 诪讛谉 讜讛讻讛谞讬诐 讛诇讜讬诐 讘谞讬 爪讚讜拽

The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 it written here in the verse that all twenty-four watches are kept by the Levites? The Gemara answers: This interpretation is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: In twenty-four places in the Bible the priests are called Levites, and this is one of them: 鈥淏ut the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok, that kept the charge of My Sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from Me, they shall come near to Me to serve Me鈥 (Ezekiel 44:15).

讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 讛专 讛讘讬转 讜讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注讛 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪转讜讻讜 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 注讝专讛 讜讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注讛 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪讘讞讜抓 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛专 讛讘讬转 讚注讘讚讬谞谉 诪转讜讻讜 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 注讝专讛 讚注讘讚讬谞谉 诪讘讞讜抓

The mishna (Middot 1:1) teaches that five watches are kept upon the five gates of the Temple Mount, and four watches are kept upon the four corners of the Temple Mount within the Temple Mount wall. Five watches are kept upon the five gates of the Temple courtyard, and four are kept upon the four corners of the Temple courtyard outside the courtyard wall, on the Temple Mount. The Gemara asks: What is different with regard to the Temple Mount that we perform the watch within the walls, and what is different with regard to the Temple courtyard that we perform the watch outside its walls?

讗诪专讬 讛专 讛讘讬转 讚讗讬 转诪讛 讜讘注讬 诪讬转讘 讬转讬讘 讗诪专讬谞谉 诪转讜讻讜 注讝专讛 讚讗讬 转诪讛 讜讘注讬 诇诪讬转讘 诇讗 诪爪讬 讬转讬讘 讚讗诪专 诪专 讗讬谉 讬砖讬讘讛 讘注讝专讛 讗诇讗 诇诪诇讻讬 讘讬转 讚讜讚 讘诇讘讚 讗诪专讬谞谉 诪讘讞讜抓

The Sages say: With regard to the watches on the Temple Mount, if the watchman tires and wants to sit down, he may sit down, as it is permitted to sit on the Temple Mount. Therefore, we say that the watch is kept within the Temple Mount. By contrast, if a watch is observed in the Temple courtyard, even if the watchman tires and wants to sit down, he may not sit down, as the Master said: Sitting in the Temple courtyard is permitted only for kings of the house of David. Therefore, we say that the watch is kept outside the walls of the Temple courtyard, so that the watchman may sit down if he wishes.

讗诪专 诪专 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 注讝专讛 讜讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬诐 讛讜讗 讚讛讜讬 讘注讝专讛 讜专诪讬谞讛讬 砖讘注讛 砖注专讬诐 讛讬讜 讘注讝专讛 砖诇砖讛 讘爪驻讜谉 讜砖诇砖讛 讘讚专讜诐 讜讗讞讚 讘诪讝专讞

The Master said above that five watches are kept upon the five gates of the Temple courtyard. The Gemara asks: But was it only five gates that were constructed in the walls of the Temple courtyard? And the Gemara raises a contradiction from a mishna (Middot 1:4): There were seven gates in the Temple courtyard: Three in the north, and three in the south, and one in the east.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 转专讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 诇讗 爪专讬讻讬 砖讬诪讜专 专讘讗 讗诪专 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 诪砖诇砖讛 注砖专 讙讝讘专讬谉 讜诪砖讘注讛 讗诪专讻诇讬谉 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 诪砖诇砖讛 注砖专 讙讝讘专讬谉 讻谞讙讚 砖诇砖讛 注砖专 砖注专讬诐 讚诇 讞诪砖讛 讚讛专 讛讘讬转 驻砖讜 诇讛讜 转诪谞讬讗 讚注讝专讛 讗诇诪讗 讗讬讻讗 转谞讗 讚讗诪专 转诪谞讬讗 讛讜讜 讜讗讬讻讗 转谞讗 讚讗诪专 砖讘注讛 讜讗讬讻讗 转谞讗 讚讗诪专 讞诪砖讛 讛讜讜

Abaye said: Although there were seven gates, two of them, the gate to the Chamber of the Spark and the gate to the Chamber of the Hearth, did not require a watch of the Levites, as the priests kept watch there. Rava said: The number of gates is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: There must be no fewer than thirteen treasurers and seven trustees appointed over the Temple administration. Rabbi Natan says: There must be no fewer than thirteen treasurers, corresponding to the thirteen gates. Remove from the total of thirteen gates the five gates of the Temple Mount, and there remain eight gates to the Temple courtyard. Evidently, there is a tanna who said that there were eight gates, and there is a tanna who said that there were seven gates, and there is also a tanna who said that there were five gates.

诇讗 讛讬讜 讬砖谞讬诐 讘讘讙讚讬 拽讚砖 讻讜壮 砖讬谞讛 讛讜讗 讚诇讗 讗讘诇 讛讬诇讜讱 诪讛诇讻讬诐 砖诪注转 诪讬谞讛 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛谉

搂 The mishna (25b) teaches that the priests would not sleep dressed in the sacred vestments; rather, they would remove them and place them beneath their heads. The Gemara infers from here that it is only sleep that is not permitted while a priest is dressed in the sacred vestments, lest he pass wind during his sleep. But with regard to wearing such vestments while the priests are awake and engaged in various activities, e.g., walking, they may walk about dressed in the vestments, even when they do not need to wear them for the Temple service. You may therefore conclude from the mishna that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments.

讗诪专讬 讛讜讗 讛讚讬谉 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讛讬诇讜讱 谞诪讬 诇讗 讜讛讗 讚拽转谞讬 诇讗 讛讬讜 讬砖谞讬诐 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬转谞讗 住讬驻讗 讗诇讗 驻讜砖讟讬谉 讜诪拽驻诇讬谉 讜诪谞讬讞讬谉 讗讜转谉 转讞转 专讗砖讬讛谉 拽转谞讬 专讬砖讗 谞诪讬 诇讗 讛讬讜 讬砖谞讬诐

The Sages say that this inference is incorrect. The same is true of walking, as even walking while wearing the vestments is not permitted, and the reason that the tanna teaches specifically that the priests would not sleep dressed in the vestments is due to the fact that the tanna wanted to teach the latter clause: Rather, they would remove them and fold them, and then they would place them beneath their heads. Since the latter clause is referring specifically to sleeping, the tanna teaches in the former clause as well that the priests would not sleep dressed in the vestments.

讜讛讗 讙讜驻讛 拽讗 拽砖讬讗 讜诪谞讬讞讬谉 讗讜转谉 转讞转 专讗砖讬讛谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛诐 讗讬诪讗 谞讙讚 专讗砖讬讛诐

The Gemara objects: But according to this interpretation, the mishna itself is difficult, as the mishna states: And they would place the priestly vestments beneath their heads, as a cushion. One may conclude from this statement that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. The Gemara rejects this interpretation: Say that the mishna means that they would place the vestments next to their heads, not literally beneath them.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 诪谉 讛爪讚 砖专讬讬谉 讜诇讗 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 讚诇诪讗 诪讬讙谞讚专 讜谞驻讬诇 注诇讬讬讛讜

Rav Pappa said: One may conclude from this interpretation of the mishna that if one places phylacteries by the side of his head while he sleeps, they are in a permitted place. And we are not concerned that perhaps he will roll over in his sleep and fall upon them, which would degrade the phylacteries.

讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪住转讘专讗 讚讻谞讙讚 专讗砖讬讛谉 讚讗讬 讗诪专转 转讞转 专讗砖讬讛谉 谞讛讬 讚谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛谉 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讗讬住讜专讗 讚讻诇讗讬诐

The Gemara comments: So too, it is reasonable to say that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only next to their heads. As, if you say that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed literally beneath their heads, this is difficult. Granted that it is permitted to derive benefit from them, but one could derive that it is prohibited to sleep upon them due to the prohibition of diverse kinds of wool and linen. The priestly vestments contain both wool and linen, which is a prohibited mixture in every other context. The Torah specifically permits the priests to wear them while they are performing the Temple service, but this does not extend to using the vestments as a cushion while sleeping.

讛谞讬讞讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诇讗 讝讛讜 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讛讚讬讜讟 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讛讚讬讜讟 讝讛讜 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专

The Gemara explains the difficulty: If one maintains that the mishna permits the priests to place the vestments beneath their heads, this works out well according to the one who said that the belt of the High Priest is not the same as the belt of an ordinary priest. Although the belt of the High Priest was made of both wool and linen, the belt of ordinary priests, like the rest of their vestments, were made entirely of linen and did not contain diverse kinds. But according to the one who said that the belt of an ordinary priest is the same as the belt of the High Priest, what is there to say? Since the belt contained diverse kinds, how could the mishna possibly permit the priests to sleep upon their vestments?

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讻诇讗讬诐 讘注诇讬讛 讜诇讘讬砖讛 讛讜讗 讚讗住讜专 讗讘诇 诪讬诪讱 转讜转讬讛 砖驻讬专 讚诪讬 讜讛转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬注诇讛 注诇讬讱 讗讘诇 讗转讛 诪爪讬注讜 转讞转讬讱 讗讘诇 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗住讜专 诇注砖讜转 讻谉 砖诪讗 转讬讻专讱 谞讬诪讗 讗讞转 注诇 讘砖专讜

And if you would say that with regard to diverse kinds it is only placing the garment upon oneself or wearing it that is prohibited, but as for spreading it beneath you, it is permitted, this explanation is difficult. But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: The verse states: 鈥淣either shall there come upon you a garment of diverse kinds鈥 (Leviticus 19:19). One should infer as follows: But you may spread a garment of diverse kinds beneath you, in order to lie upon it. The baraita continues: This is the halakha by Torah law, but the Sages said that it is prohibited to do so, lest a single fiber wrap itself upon his flesh, which would cause him to be in transgression of the Torah prohibition. Accordingly, the priests should not be permitted to place vestments made of diverse kinds beneath their heads.

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讚诪驻住讬拽 诪讬讚讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 砖讗讜诇 诪砖讜诐 拽讛诇讗 拽讚讬砖讗 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗驻讬诇讜 注砖专 诪爪注讜转 讝讜 注诇 讙讘 讝讜 讜讻诇讗讬诐 转讞转讬讛谉 讗住讜专 诇讬砖谉 注诇讬讛谉 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 谞讙讚 专讗砖讬讛谉

And if you would say that the priests could place the vestments beneath their heads in such a manner that something separates between their flesh and the vestments, as the fibers could not wrap themselves upon their flesh, such conduct would still be prohibited. Doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Shimon say that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says that Rabbi Yosei ben Shaul says in the name of the holy community in Jerusalem: Even if there are ten mattresses piled one atop the other and a garment of diverse kinds is placed beneath all of them, it is prohibited to sleep upon them? This is because the rabbinic decree applies equally to all cases, irrespective of whether the concern that motivated the decree exists. Rather, one may conclude from here that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only next to their heads.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讗讜转谉 砖讗讬谉 讘讛谉 讻诇讗讬诐 专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 拽砖讬谉 讛谉 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讛讗 谞诪讟讗 讙诪讚讗 讚谞专砖 砖专讬讗

The Gemara suggests alternative solutions: And if you wish, say instead that the mishna does permit the priests to place the vestments beneath their heads, as it is referring to those vestments that do not contain diverse kinds. Rav Ashi says: The mishna permits the priests to place even the belt that contains diverse kinds beneath their heads. This is because the priestly vestments, and specifically the belt, are stiff, and therefore it is not prohibited to lie on them. As Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yehoshua, said: This stiff felt [namta], which is manufactured in the city of Neresh and is made of diverse kinds, is permitted. The prohibition of diverse kinds applies only to items that are similar to garments, which one derives pleasure from wearing. A stiff garment does not provide warmth, and is therefore not included in this prohibition.

转讗 砖诪注 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 讛讬讜爪讗 讘讛谉 诇诪讚讬谞讛 讗住讜专 讜讘诪拽讚砖 讘讬谉 讘砖注转 注讘讜讚讛 讜讘讬谉 砖诇讗 讘砖注转 注讘讜讚讛 诪讜转专 诪驻谞讬 砖讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

The Gemara returns to discuss the earlier dilemma, of whether it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. Come and hear a baraita: With regard to the priestly vestments, the act of one who leaves the Temple dressed in them and goes out to the country, i.e., outside the Temple, is prohibited. But in the Temple, both at the time of the Temple service and not at the time of the service, wearing the vestments is permitted, as it is permitted to derive benefit from the priestly vestments. The Gemara concludes: One may conclude from the baraita that it is permitted to derive benefit from the priestly vestments.

讜讘诪讚讬谞讛 诇讗 讜讛转谞讬讗 讘注砖专讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讘讜 讬讜诐 讛专 讙专讬讝讬诐 讚诇讗 诇诪讬住驻讚 讻讚讗讬转讗 讘讬讜诪讗 驻专拽 讘讗 诇讜 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 拽专讜讘 讜讻讜壮

According to the baraita, the priestly vestments may not be worn outside the Temple. The Gemara asks: And is it not permitted to wear the priestly vestments in the rest of the country, outside the Temple? But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita, in connection with a date mentioned in Megillat Ta鈥檃nit: On the twenty-first of Tevet, this is the day of Mount Gerizim, which was established as a festive day, and therefore it is not permitted to eulogize. This date was established as a festive day because the Temple was saved from destruction on that day, due to the actions of Shimon HaTzaddik, the High Priest, as it is related in tractate Yoma (69a), in the seventh chapter, which begins: The High Priest came close to read the Torah.

注讚 讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 专讗讜讬讬谉 讛谉 诇讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛

The baraita relates that Shimon HaTzaddik went to greet Alexander the Macedonian wearing the priestly vestments. The Gemara in Yoma cites the complete baraita, up to the Gemara鈥檚 explanation as to why Shimon HaTzaddik wore the priestly vestments outside the Temple: If you wish, say that Shimon HaTzaddik did not wear consecrated priestly vestments. Rather, he wore garments that were fit to be priestly vestments, i.e., they were made of the same material and design.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 注转 诇注砖讜转 诇讛壮 讛驻专讜 转讜专转讱

And if you wish, say instead that he did in fact wear consecrated priestly vestments. Although this is usually prohibited, in this instance it was permitted due to the principle: 鈥淚t is time to act for the Lord; they have nullified Your Torah鈥 (Psalms 119:126). In times of great need, such as when one seeks to prevent the destruction of the Temple, it is permitted to violate the halakha for the sake of Heaven, and the actions of Shimon HaTzaddik indeed averted the destruction.

讗讬专注 拽专讬 讘讗讞讚 诪讛谉 [讜讻讜壮]

搂 The mishna teaches (25b): If a seminal emission befell one of the priests and rendered him ritually impure, he would leave the Chamber of the Hearth and he would walk through the circuitous passage that extended beneath the Temple, as he could not pass through the Temple courtyard, due to his impurity.

诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 诪讞讬诇讜转 诇讗 谞转拽讚砖讜 讘注诇 拽专讬 诪砖转诇讞 讞讜抓 诇砖谞讬 诪讞谞讜转

The Gemara notes that this mishna supports the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan, who says: The tunnels beneath the Temple Mount were not sanctified, neither with the sanctity of the Temple courtyard nor with the sanctity of the Temple Mount. The Gemara cites a related statement of Rabbi Yo岣nan: A man who experienced a seminal emission is sent outside of two camps, the camp of the Divine Presence and the camp of the Levites. Accordingly, he may not remain in the Temple courtyard, which has the status of the camp of the Divine Presence, nor on the Temple Mount, which has the status of the camp of the Levites.

讜讛谞专讜转 讚讜诇拽讬谉 诪讻讗谉 讜诪讻讗谉 讻讜壮 专讘 住驻专讗 讛讜讛 讬转讬讘 讘讘讬转 讛讻住讗 讗转讗 专讘讬 讗讘讗 谞讞专 诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讬注讜诇 诪专

The mishna teaches: And the lamps were burning on this side and on that side of the passage鈥nd there was a bathroom of honor in the Chamber of Immersion. This was its honor: If one found the door closed, he would know that there was a person there, and he would wait for him to exit before entering. The Gemara relates: Rav Safra was sitting in the bathroom when Rabbi Abba came along. Since there was no door, Rabbi Abba coughed outside to alert anyone within of his presence and thereby inquire whether he could enter. Rav Safra said to Rabbi Abba: Enter, Master, and Rabbi Abba therefore entered the bathroom.

讘转专 讚谞驻讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗讘讗 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 住诇讬拽转 诇砖注讬专 讙诪专转 诪讬诇讬 讚砖注讬专 诇讗讜 讛讻讬 转谞谉 诪爪讗讜 谞注讜诇 讘讬讚讜注 砖讬砖 砖诐 讗讚诐 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚诇讗 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇诪讬注诇

When he came out, Rabbi Abba said to Rav Safra: Until now, although you have traveled widely, you have never entered Seir, the land of the Edomites, who behave immodestly. Nevertheless, you have learned the ways of Seir. Didn鈥檛 we learn this in the mishna: If one found the door closed, it was known that there was a person there, and one would wait for him to exit before entering. This serves to say that a person should not enter the bathroom while another person is inside. Therefore, Rav Safra should not have told Rabbi Abba to enter.

讜专讘 住驻专讗 住讘专 讚诇诪讗 诪住讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讻讚转谞讬讗 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 注诪讜讚 讛讞讜讝专 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讛讗讚诐 诇讬讚讬 讛讚专讜拽谉 住讬诇讜谉 讛讞讜讝专 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讛讗讚诐 诇讬讚讬 讬专拽讜谉

The Gemara explains that Rav Safra told Rabbi Abba to enter because he thought: Perhaps Rabbi Abba is in danger. Rav Safra was concerned that if Rabbi Abba waited for him to exit, Rabbi Abba might jeopardize his health, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A column of feces that is held back, because one refrains from relieving himself, causes a person to suffer from edema [hidrokan]. A stream of urine that is held back causes a person to suffer from jaundice [yerakon].

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诇讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讜讻谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讞砖讬讱 转拽讬谉 谞驻砖讱 讜拽讚讬诐 转拽讬谉 谞驻砖讱 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 转专讞拽 转讜讘 讜讙诇讬 讻住讬 讜拽讜诐

Rav said to his son 岣yya, and likewise Rav Huna said to his son Rabba: Relieve yourself when it gets dark, and relieve yourself before daybreak, even if you have no particular need to do so. The reason is that the streets are mostly empty at these times, and one can relieve himself near his home without concern that he might be seen. This is important, so that you will not have to relieve yourself during the day, when the streets are full, and you will be compelled to retain your feces while you distance yourself, which is liable to jeopardize your health. Furthermore, when relieving yourself, you should behave modestly. Sit down first and only then uncover yourself; afterward, cover yourself first and only then stand up.

砖讟讜祝 讜砖转讬 [砖讟讜祝] 讜讗讞讬转 讜讻砖讗转讛 砖讜转讛 诪讬诐 砖驻讜讱 诪讛谉 讜讗讞专 讻讱 转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讱

With regard to drinking, these amora鈥檌m instructed their sons: When you drink wine, rinse the cup first and only then drink from it; after you drink, rinse the cup and only then set it back in its place. But when you drink water, it is not necessary to rinse the cup afterward; rather, pour out some of the water to rinse the rim of the cup, and afterward you may give the cup to your student, if he wants to drink.

讻讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬砖转讛 讗讚诐 诪讬诐 讜讬转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 砖驻讱 诪讛谉 讜诪注砖讛 讘讗讞讚 砖砖转讛 诪讬诐 讜诇讗 砖驻讱 诪讛谉 讜谞转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讜 讜讗讜转讜 转诇诪讬讚 讗讬住讟谞讬住 讛讬讛 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇砖转讜转 讜诪转 讘爪诪讗 讘讗讜转讛 砖注讛 讗诪专讜 诇讗 讬砖转讛 讗讚诐 诪讬诐 讜讬转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 砖驻讱 诪讛谉 专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讛讬诇讻讱 讛讗讬 转诇诪讬讚讗 讚砖驻讬讱 拽诪讬 专讘讬讛 诇讬转 讘讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讗驻拽讬专讜转讗

As it is taught in a baraita: A person should not drink water and give the remaining water to his student, unless he first poured some of it out. And there was an incident involving a certain individual who drank water and did not pour some of it out, and he gave the cup to his student. And that student was a delicate person [istenis], and due to his sensitivity he did not want to drink from the cup, and he died of thirst. At that time, the Sages said: A person should not drink water and give the remaining water to his student unless he first poured some of it out. Rav Ashi said: Therefore, in the case of this student who pours water from the cup that his teacher drank from first, even if he does so in the presence of his teacher, his actions are not prohibited due to disrespect [afkiruta].

讻诇 诪讬诇讬 诇讗 转讬驻诇讜讟 讘讗驻讬 专讘讱 讘专 诪拽专讗 讜讚讬讬住讗 讚讻驻转讬诇讛 砖诇 讗讘专 讚诪讜

With regard to eating, these amora鈥檌m instructed their sons: In the case of anything that you are eating, if the food causes you to salivate and you need to spit out the saliva, do not spit it out in the presence of your teacher, as it is disrespectful, except in the case of a dish of gourd or porridge. If one is eating gourds or porridge he may spit out the saliva even in the presence of his teacher, as the saliva generated by these items is like a molten bar of lead, and refraining from spitting it out would be dangerous.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讗讬砖 讛专 讛讘讬转 讛讬讛 诪讞讝专 注诇 讻诇 诪砖诪专 讜诪砖诪专 讜讗讘讜拽讜转 讚讜诇拽讜转 诇驻谞讬讜 讜讻诇 诪砖诪专 砖讗讬谞讜 注讜诪讚 讜讗讜诪专 诇讜 讗讬砖 讛专 讛讘讬转

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Middot 1:2): The man [ish] in charge of overseeing the watches of the Temple Mount would circulate nightly among each and every watch post, to ascertain that the watchmen were awake and performing their duty properly. And there were lit torches carried before him, so that the watchmen would see him approaching. And at every watch post where the watchman would not stand up, the man would test whether the watchman was sleeping; and the man of the Temple Mount would say to him:

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Tamid 27

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Tamid 27

驻专讞讬 讻讛讜谞讛 讗诪专讬 讗讬谉 讛转诐 讚诇讗 诪讟讜 诇诪注讘讚 注讘讜讚讛 拽专讬 诇讛讜 专讜讘讬诐 讛讻讗 讚诪讟讜 诇讛讜 诇诪注讘讚 注讘讜讚讛 拽专讬 诇讛讜 驻专讞讬

the young men of the priesthood [pir岣i khehunna]? Is there a distinction between these different terms? The Sages say: Yes, there is a distinction. There, with regard to the priests who keep watch in the Chamber of Avtinas and in the Chamber of the Spark, the mishna is referring to priests who have not reached the age at which they are eligible to perform the Temple service, and therefore the tanna calls them young priests. The older priests would not keep watch, as they preferred to perform the Temple service. Here, with regard to the priests who sleep in the Chamber of the Hearth in order to be ready to perform the morning rites, the mishna is referring to priests who have reached the age at which they are eligible to perform the Temple service, and consequently the tanna calls them the young men of the priesthood.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讘砖诇砖讛 诪拽讜诪讜转 讛讻讛谞讬诐 砖讜诪专讬诐 讘讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讘讘讬转 讗讘讟讬谞住 讜讘讘讬转 讛谞讬爪讜抓 讜讘讘讬转 讛诪讜拽讚

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Middot 1:1): The priests would keep watch in three places in the Temple courtyard: In the Chamber of Avtinas, and in the Chamber of the Spark, and in the Chamber of the Hearth.

讜讛诇讜讬诐 讘注砖专讬诐 讜讗讞讚 诪拽讜诪讜转 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 讛专 讛讘讬转 讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪讘驻谞讬诐 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 注讝专讛 讜讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪讘讞讜抓 讗讞讚 讘诇砖讻转 讛拽专讘谉 讜讗讞讚 讘诇砖讻转 讛驻专讜讻转 讜讗讞讚 讗讞讜专讬 讘讬转 讛讻驻讜专转

And the Levites would keep watch in twenty-one places, as follows: Five upon the five gates of the Temple Mount; four upon the four corners of the Temple Mount, within the wall surrounding the Temple Mount; five upon the five gates of the Temple courtyard, and four upon the four corners of the Temple courtyard outside the courtyard wall, surrounding the Temple courtyard. One watch is observed in the Chamber of the Offering, where animals that had been checked for blemishes were held in readiness for sacrifice; one watch is kept in the Chamber of the Curtain, where the Curtain separating the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies was woven; and finally, one watch is kept behind the Chamber of the Ark Cover, in the area between the Holy of Holies and the western wall of the Temple Mount.

诪谞讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪住讜专讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 讚讻转讬讘 诇诪讝专讞 讛诇讜讬诐 砖砖讛 诇爪驻讜谞讛 诇讜讬诐 讗专讘注讛 诇谞讙讘讛 诇讜讬诐 讗专讘注讛 讜诇讗住驻讬诐 砖谞讬诐 砖谞讬诐 诇驻专讘专 诇诪注专讘 讗专讘注讛 诇诪住诇讛 砖谞讬诐 诇驻专讘专

With regard to these twenty-one places where the Levites keep watch, the Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Yehuda of Sura said, and some say that it was taught in a baraita: This is derived as it is written with regard to the Levites assigned by David to serve as gatekeepers upon the future construction of the Temple: Eastward were six Levites, northward four Levites, southward four Levites, and for the Asuppim two and two. For the Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at the Parbar (see I聽Chronicles 26:17鈥18).

讗诪专讬 讛谞讬 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讛讜讜 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 诇讗住驻讬诐 砖谞讬诐 (砖谞讬诐)

The Sages say that if these verses are the source for the twenty-one places in which the Levites keep watch, that is difficult, as these watches enumerated in the verse are twenty-four in total. Abaye said: This is what the verse is saying: 鈥淔or the Asuppim two,鈥 and they are always only two. It is not uncommon for a verse to repeat a word for emphasis in this manner, especially at the end of a verse.

讗讻转讬 注砖专讬谉 讜转专讬 讛讜讜 讛讬讗讱 讚驻专讘专 讞讚 讛讜讛 讜讗讞专讬谞讗 讘爪讜讜转讗 讛讜讗 讚讗讝讬诇 讜讬转讬讘 讙讘讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗讬 讗讘专讗讬

The Gemara objects: Even if two locations are removed from the list, according to the verse there are still twenty-two watches, rather than twenty-one. The Gemara explains: That watch, which was situated at the Parbar, was composed of only one watchman, and as for the other Levite mentioned in the verse, it was merely to serve as company that he went and sat with the watchman, due to the fact that the Parbar was situated on the outer side and was isolated from the other watches.

诪讗讬 诇驻专讘专 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 讻诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻诇驻讬 讘专

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the term 鈥渁t the Parbar [laParbar]鈥 (I聽Chronicles 26:18)? Rabba bar Rav Sheila said: This term is a contraction of two Aramaic words, and it is like one who says: Toward the outside [kelapei bar].

讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诇注讜诇诐 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讻讚讻转讬讘 转诇转讗 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讚讻讛谞讬诐 讜注砖专讬谉 讜讞讚 讚诇讜讬诐

The Gemara presents an alternative answer to the question with regard to the verse: And if you wish, say instead that actually there are twenty-four watches, and the verse may be interpreted literally as it is written. Three of them are the watches kept by the priests, and the remaining twenty-one are the watches kept by the Levites.

讜讛讗 讛讻讗 诇讜讬诐 讛讜讗 讚讻转讬讘 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讘注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 诪拽讜诪讜转 谞拽专讗讜 讻讛谞讬诐 诇讜讬诐 讜讝讛 讗讞讚 诪讛谉 讜讛讻讛谞讬诐 讛诇讜讬诐 讘谞讬 爪讚讜拽

The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 it written here in the verse that all twenty-four watches are kept by the Levites? The Gemara answers: This interpretation is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: In twenty-four places in the Bible the priests are called Levites, and this is one of them: 鈥淏ut the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok, that kept the charge of My Sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from Me, they shall come near to Me to serve Me鈥 (Ezekiel 44:15).

讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 讛专 讛讘讬转 讜讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注讛 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪转讜讻讜 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 注讝专讛 讜讗专讘注讛 注诇 讗专讘注讛 驻谞讜转讬讜 诪讘讞讜抓 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛专 讛讘讬转 讚注讘讚讬谞谉 诪转讜讻讜 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 注讝专讛 讚注讘讚讬谞谉 诪讘讞讜抓

The mishna (Middot 1:1) teaches that five watches are kept upon the five gates of the Temple Mount, and four watches are kept upon the four corners of the Temple Mount within the Temple Mount wall. Five watches are kept upon the five gates of the Temple courtyard, and four are kept upon the four corners of the Temple courtyard outside the courtyard wall, on the Temple Mount. The Gemara asks: What is different with regard to the Temple Mount that we perform the watch within the walls, and what is different with regard to the Temple courtyard that we perform the watch outside its walls?

讗诪专讬 讛专 讛讘讬转 讚讗讬 转诪讛 讜讘注讬 诪讬转讘 讬转讬讘 讗诪专讬谞谉 诪转讜讻讜 注讝专讛 讚讗讬 转诪讛 讜讘注讬 诇诪讬转讘 诇讗 诪爪讬 讬转讬讘 讚讗诪专 诪专 讗讬谉 讬砖讬讘讛 讘注讝专讛 讗诇讗 诇诪诇讻讬 讘讬转 讚讜讚 讘诇讘讚 讗诪专讬谞谉 诪讘讞讜抓

The Sages say: With regard to the watches on the Temple Mount, if the watchman tires and wants to sit down, he may sit down, as it is permitted to sit on the Temple Mount. Therefore, we say that the watch is kept within the Temple Mount. By contrast, if a watch is observed in the Temple courtyard, even if the watchman tires and wants to sit down, he may not sit down, as the Master said: Sitting in the Temple courtyard is permitted only for kings of the house of David. Therefore, we say that the watch is kept outside the walls of the Temple courtyard, so that the watchman may sit down if he wishes.

讗诪专 诪专 讞诪砖讛 注诇 讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬 注讝专讛 讜讞诪砖讛 砖注专讬诐 讛讜讗 讚讛讜讬 讘注讝专讛 讜专诪讬谞讛讬 砖讘注讛 砖注专讬诐 讛讬讜 讘注讝专讛 砖诇砖讛 讘爪驻讜谉 讜砖诇砖讛 讘讚专讜诐 讜讗讞讚 讘诪讝专讞

The Master said above that five watches are kept upon the five gates of the Temple courtyard. The Gemara asks: But was it only five gates that were constructed in the walls of the Temple courtyard? And the Gemara raises a contradiction from a mishna (Middot 1:4): There were seven gates in the Temple courtyard: Three in the north, and three in the south, and one in the east.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 转专讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 诇讗 爪专讬讻讬 砖讬诪讜专 专讘讗 讗诪专 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 诪砖诇砖讛 注砖专 讙讝讘专讬谉 讜诪砖讘注讛 讗诪专讻诇讬谉 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗讜诪专 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 诪砖诇砖讛 注砖专 讙讝讘专讬谉 讻谞讙讚 砖诇砖讛 注砖专 砖注专讬诐 讚诇 讞诪砖讛 讚讛专 讛讘讬转 驻砖讜 诇讛讜 转诪谞讬讗 讚注讝专讛 讗诇诪讗 讗讬讻讗 转谞讗 讚讗诪专 转诪谞讬讗 讛讜讜 讜讗讬讻讗 转谞讗 讚讗诪专 砖讘注讛 讜讗讬讻讗 转谞讗 讚讗诪专 讞诪砖讛 讛讜讜

Abaye said: Although there were seven gates, two of them, the gate to the Chamber of the Spark and the gate to the Chamber of the Hearth, did not require a watch of the Levites, as the priests kept watch there. Rava said: The number of gates is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: There must be no fewer than thirteen treasurers and seven trustees appointed over the Temple administration. Rabbi Natan says: There must be no fewer than thirteen treasurers, corresponding to the thirteen gates. Remove from the total of thirteen gates the five gates of the Temple Mount, and there remain eight gates to the Temple courtyard. Evidently, there is a tanna who said that there were eight gates, and there is a tanna who said that there were seven gates, and there is also a tanna who said that there were five gates.

诇讗 讛讬讜 讬砖谞讬诐 讘讘讙讚讬 拽讚砖 讻讜壮 砖讬谞讛 讛讜讗 讚诇讗 讗讘诇 讛讬诇讜讱 诪讛诇讻讬诐 砖诪注转 诪讬谞讛 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛谉

搂 The mishna (25b) teaches that the priests would not sleep dressed in the sacred vestments; rather, they would remove them and place them beneath their heads. The Gemara infers from here that it is only sleep that is not permitted while a priest is dressed in the sacred vestments, lest he pass wind during his sleep. But with regard to wearing such vestments while the priests are awake and engaged in various activities, e.g., walking, they may walk about dressed in the vestments, even when they do not need to wear them for the Temple service. You may therefore conclude from the mishna that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments.

讗诪专讬 讛讜讗 讛讚讬谉 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讛讬诇讜讱 谞诪讬 诇讗 讜讛讗 讚拽转谞讬 诇讗 讛讬讜 讬砖谞讬诐 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬转谞讗 住讬驻讗 讗诇讗 驻讜砖讟讬谉 讜诪拽驻诇讬谉 讜诪谞讬讞讬谉 讗讜转谉 转讞转 专讗砖讬讛谉 拽转谞讬 专讬砖讗 谞诪讬 诇讗 讛讬讜 讬砖谞讬诐

The Sages say that this inference is incorrect. The same is true of walking, as even walking while wearing the vestments is not permitted, and the reason that the tanna teaches specifically that the priests would not sleep dressed in the vestments is due to the fact that the tanna wanted to teach the latter clause: Rather, they would remove them and fold them, and then they would place them beneath their heads. Since the latter clause is referring specifically to sleeping, the tanna teaches in the former clause as well that the priests would not sleep dressed in the vestments.

讜讛讗 讙讜驻讛 拽讗 拽砖讬讗 讜诪谞讬讞讬谉 讗讜转谉 转讞转 专讗砖讬讛谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛诐 讗讬诪讗 谞讙讚 专讗砖讬讛诐

The Gemara objects: But according to this interpretation, the mishna itself is difficult, as the mishna states: And they would place the priestly vestments beneath their heads, as a cushion. One may conclude from this statement that it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. The Gemara rejects this interpretation: Say that the mishna means that they would place the vestments next to their heads, not literally beneath them.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 转驻讬诇讬谉 诪谉 讛爪讚 砖专讬讬谉 讜诇讗 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 讚诇诪讗 诪讬讙谞讚专 讜谞驻讬诇 注诇讬讬讛讜

Rav Pappa said: One may conclude from this interpretation of the mishna that if one places phylacteries by the side of his head while he sleeps, they are in a permitted place. And we are not concerned that perhaps he will roll over in his sleep and fall upon them, which would degrade the phylacteries.

讛讻讬 谞诪讬 诪住转讘专讗 讚讻谞讙讚 专讗砖讬讛谉 讚讗讬 讗诪专转 转讞转 专讗砖讬讛谉 谞讛讬 讚谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛谉 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讗讬住讜专讗 讚讻诇讗讬诐

The Gemara comments: So too, it is reasonable to say that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only next to their heads. As, if you say that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed literally beneath their heads, this is difficult. Granted that it is permitted to derive benefit from them, but one could derive that it is prohibited to sleep upon them due to the prohibition of diverse kinds of wool and linen. The priestly vestments contain both wool and linen, which is a prohibited mixture in every other context. The Torah specifically permits the priests to wear them while they are performing the Temple service, but this does not extend to using the vestments as a cushion while sleeping.

讛谞讬讞讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诇讗 讝讛讜 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讛讚讬讜讟 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讛讚讬讜讟 讝讛讜 讗讘谞讟讜 砖诇 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专

The Gemara explains the difficulty: If one maintains that the mishna permits the priests to place the vestments beneath their heads, this works out well according to the one who said that the belt of the High Priest is not the same as the belt of an ordinary priest. Although the belt of the High Priest was made of both wool and linen, the belt of ordinary priests, like the rest of their vestments, were made entirely of linen and did not contain diverse kinds. But according to the one who said that the belt of an ordinary priest is the same as the belt of the High Priest, what is there to say? Since the belt contained diverse kinds, how could the mishna possibly permit the priests to sleep upon their vestments?

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讻诇讗讬诐 讘注诇讬讛 讜诇讘讬砖讛 讛讜讗 讚讗住讜专 讗讘诇 诪讬诪讱 转讜转讬讛 砖驻讬专 讚诪讬 讜讛转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬注诇讛 注诇讬讱 讗讘诇 讗转讛 诪爪讬注讜 转讞转讬讱 讗讘诇 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗住讜专 诇注砖讜转 讻谉 砖诪讗 转讬讻专讱 谞讬诪讗 讗讞转 注诇 讘砖专讜

And if you would say that with regard to diverse kinds it is only placing the garment upon oneself or wearing it that is prohibited, but as for spreading it beneath you, it is permitted, this explanation is difficult. But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: The verse states: 鈥淣either shall there come upon you a garment of diverse kinds鈥 (Leviticus 19:19). One should infer as follows: But you may spread a garment of diverse kinds beneath you, in order to lie upon it. The baraita continues: This is the halakha by Torah law, but the Sages said that it is prohibited to do so, lest a single fiber wrap itself upon his flesh, which would cause him to be in transgression of the Torah prohibition. Accordingly, the priests should not be permitted to place vestments made of diverse kinds beneath their heads.

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讚诪驻住讬拽 诪讬讚讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘谉 砖讗讜诇 诪砖讜诐 拽讛诇讗 拽讚讬砖讗 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗驻讬诇讜 注砖专 诪爪注讜转 讝讜 注诇 讙讘 讝讜 讜讻诇讗讬诐 转讞转讬讛谉 讗住讜专 诇讬砖谉 注诇讬讛谉 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 谞讙讚 专讗砖讬讛谉

And if you would say that the priests could place the vestments beneath their heads in such a manner that something separates between their flesh and the vestments, as the fibers could not wrap themselves upon their flesh, such conduct would still be prohibited. Doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Shimon say that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says that Rabbi Yosei ben Shaul says in the name of the holy community in Jerusalem: Even if there are ten mattresses piled one atop the other and a garment of diverse kinds is placed beneath all of them, it is prohibited to sleep upon them? This is because the rabbinic decree applies equally to all cases, irrespective of whether the concern that motivated the decree exists. Rather, one may conclude from here that the mishna permits the vestments to be placed only next to their heads.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讗讜转谉 砖讗讬谉 讘讛谉 讻诇讗讬诐 专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 拽砖讬谉 讛谉 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讛讗 谞诪讟讗 讙诪讚讗 讚谞专砖 砖专讬讗

The Gemara suggests alternative solutions: And if you wish, say instead that the mishna does permit the priests to place the vestments beneath their heads, as it is referring to those vestments that do not contain diverse kinds. Rav Ashi says: The mishna permits the priests to place even the belt that contains diverse kinds beneath their heads. This is because the priestly vestments, and specifically the belt, are stiff, and therefore it is not prohibited to lie on them. As Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yehoshua, said: This stiff felt [namta], which is manufactured in the city of Neresh and is made of diverse kinds, is permitted. The prohibition of diverse kinds applies only to items that are similar to garments, which one derives pleasure from wearing. A stiff garment does not provide warmth, and is therefore not included in this prohibition.

转讗 砖诪注 讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 讛讬讜爪讗 讘讛谉 诇诪讚讬谞讛 讗住讜专 讜讘诪拽讚砖 讘讬谉 讘砖注转 注讘讜讚讛 讜讘讬谉 砖诇讗 讘砖注转 注讘讜讚讛 诪讜转专 诪驻谞讬 砖讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛 谞讬转谞讜 诇讬讛谞讜转 讘讛谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

The Gemara returns to discuss the earlier dilemma, of whether it is permitted to derive benefit from priestly vestments. Come and hear a baraita: With regard to the priestly vestments, the act of one who leaves the Temple dressed in them and goes out to the country, i.e., outside the Temple, is prohibited. But in the Temple, both at the time of the Temple service and not at the time of the service, wearing the vestments is permitted, as it is permitted to derive benefit from the priestly vestments. The Gemara concludes: One may conclude from the baraita that it is permitted to derive benefit from the priestly vestments.

讜讘诪讚讬谞讛 诇讗 讜讛转谞讬讗 讘注砖专讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讘讜 讬讜诐 讛专 讙专讬讝讬诐 讚诇讗 诇诪讬住驻讚 讻讚讗讬转讗 讘讬讜诪讗 驻专拽 讘讗 诇讜 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 拽专讜讘 讜讻讜壮

According to the baraita, the priestly vestments may not be worn outside the Temple. The Gemara asks: And is it not permitted to wear the priestly vestments in the rest of the country, outside the Temple? But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita, in connection with a date mentioned in Megillat Ta鈥檃nit: On the twenty-first of Tevet, this is the day of Mount Gerizim, which was established as a festive day, and therefore it is not permitted to eulogize. This date was established as a festive day because the Temple was saved from destruction on that day, due to the actions of Shimon HaTzaddik, the High Priest, as it is related in tractate Yoma (69a), in the seventh chapter, which begins: The High Priest came close to read the Torah.

注讚 讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 专讗讜讬讬谉 讛谉 诇讘讙讚讬 讻讛讜谞讛

The baraita relates that Shimon HaTzaddik went to greet Alexander the Macedonian wearing the priestly vestments. The Gemara in Yoma cites the complete baraita, up to the Gemara鈥檚 explanation as to why Shimon HaTzaddik wore the priestly vestments outside the Temple: If you wish, say that Shimon HaTzaddik did not wear consecrated priestly vestments. Rather, he wore garments that were fit to be priestly vestments, i.e., they were made of the same material and design.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 注转 诇注砖讜转 诇讛壮 讛驻专讜 转讜专转讱

And if you wish, say instead that he did in fact wear consecrated priestly vestments. Although this is usually prohibited, in this instance it was permitted due to the principle: 鈥淚t is time to act for the Lord; they have nullified Your Torah鈥 (Psalms 119:126). In times of great need, such as when one seeks to prevent the destruction of the Temple, it is permitted to violate the halakha for the sake of Heaven, and the actions of Shimon HaTzaddik indeed averted the destruction.

讗讬专注 拽专讬 讘讗讞讚 诪讛谉 [讜讻讜壮]

搂 The mishna teaches (25b): If a seminal emission befell one of the priests and rendered him ritually impure, he would leave the Chamber of the Hearth and he would walk through the circuitous passage that extended beneath the Temple, as he could not pass through the Temple courtyard, due to his impurity.

诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 诪讞讬诇讜转 诇讗 谞转拽讚砖讜 讘注诇 拽专讬 诪砖转诇讞 讞讜抓 诇砖谞讬 诪讞谞讜转

The Gemara notes that this mishna supports the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan, who says: The tunnels beneath the Temple Mount were not sanctified, neither with the sanctity of the Temple courtyard nor with the sanctity of the Temple Mount. The Gemara cites a related statement of Rabbi Yo岣nan: A man who experienced a seminal emission is sent outside of two camps, the camp of the Divine Presence and the camp of the Levites. Accordingly, he may not remain in the Temple courtyard, which has the status of the camp of the Divine Presence, nor on the Temple Mount, which has the status of the camp of the Levites.

讜讛谞专讜转 讚讜诇拽讬谉 诪讻讗谉 讜诪讻讗谉 讻讜壮 专讘 住驻专讗 讛讜讛 讬转讬讘 讘讘讬转 讛讻住讗 讗转讗 专讘讬 讗讘讗 谞讞专 诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讬注讜诇 诪专

The mishna teaches: And the lamps were burning on this side and on that side of the passage鈥nd there was a bathroom of honor in the Chamber of Immersion. This was its honor: If one found the door closed, he would know that there was a person there, and he would wait for him to exit before entering. The Gemara relates: Rav Safra was sitting in the bathroom when Rabbi Abba came along. Since there was no door, Rabbi Abba coughed outside to alert anyone within of his presence and thereby inquire whether he could enter. Rav Safra said to Rabbi Abba: Enter, Master, and Rabbi Abba therefore entered the bathroom.

讘转专 讚谞驻讬拽 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗讘讗 注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 住诇讬拽转 诇砖注讬专 讙诪专转 诪讬诇讬 讚砖注讬专 诇讗讜 讛讻讬 转谞谉 诪爪讗讜 谞注讜诇 讘讬讚讜注 砖讬砖 砖诐 讗讚诐 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚诇讗 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇诪讬注诇

When he came out, Rabbi Abba said to Rav Safra: Until now, although you have traveled widely, you have never entered Seir, the land of the Edomites, who behave immodestly. Nevertheless, you have learned the ways of Seir. Didn鈥檛 we learn this in the mishna: If one found the door closed, it was known that there was a person there, and one would wait for him to exit before entering. This serves to say that a person should not enter the bathroom while another person is inside. Therefore, Rav Safra should not have told Rabbi Abba to enter.

讜专讘 住驻专讗 住讘专 讚诇诪讗 诪住讜讻谉 讛讜讗 讻讚转谞讬讗 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 注诪讜讚 讛讞讜讝专 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讛讗讚诐 诇讬讚讬 讛讚专讜拽谉 住讬诇讜谉 讛讞讜讝专 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讛讗讚诐 诇讬讚讬 讬专拽讜谉

The Gemara explains that Rav Safra told Rabbi Abba to enter because he thought: Perhaps Rabbi Abba is in danger. Rav Safra was concerned that if Rabbi Abba waited for him to exit, Rabbi Abba might jeopardize his health, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A column of feces that is held back, because one refrains from relieving himself, causes a person to suffer from edema [hidrokan]. A stream of urine that is held back causes a person to suffer from jaundice [yerakon].

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诇讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讜讻谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇专讘讛 讘专讬讛 讞砖讬讱 转拽讬谉 谞驻砖讱 讜拽讚讬诐 转拽讬谉 谞驻砖讱 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 转专讞拽 转讜讘 讜讙诇讬 讻住讬 讜拽讜诐

Rav said to his son 岣yya, and likewise Rav Huna said to his son Rabba: Relieve yourself when it gets dark, and relieve yourself before daybreak, even if you have no particular need to do so. The reason is that the streets are mostly empty at these times, and one can relieve himself near his home without concern that he might be seen. This is important, so that you will not have to relieve yourself during the day, when the streets are full, and you will be compelled to retain your feces while you distance yourself, which is liable to jeopardize your health. Furthermore, when relieving yourself, you should behave modestly. Sit down first and only then uncover yourself; afterward, cover yourself first and only then stand up.

砖讟讜祝 讜砖转讬 [砖讟讜祝] 讜讗讞讬转 讜讻砖讗转讛 砖讜转讛 诪讬诐 砖驻讜讱 诪讛谉 讜讗讞专 讻讱 转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讱

With regard to drinking, these amora鈥檌m instructed their sons: When you drink wine, rinse the cup first and only then drink from it; after you drink, rinse the cup and only then set it back in its place. But when you drink water, it is not necessary to rinse the cup afterward; rather, pour out some of the water to rinse the rim of the cup, and afterward you may give the cup to your student, if he wants to drink.

讻讚转谞讬讗 诇讗 讬砖转讛 讗讚诐 诪讬诐 讜讬转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 砖驻讱 诪讛谉 讜诪注砖讛 讘讗讞讚 砖砖转讛 诪讬诐 讜诇讗 砖驻讱 诪讛谉 讜谞转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讜 讜讗讜转讜 转诇诪讬讚 讗讬住讟谞讬住 讛讬讛 讜诇讗 专爪讛 诇砖转讜转 讜诪转 讘爪诪讗 讘讗讜转讛 砖注讛 讗诪专讜 诇讗 讬砖转讛 讗讚诐 诪讬诐 讜讬转谉 诇转诇诪讬讚讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 砖驻讱 诪讛谉 专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讛讬诇讻讱 讛讗讬 转诇诪讬讚讗 讚砖驻讬讱 拽诪讬 专讘讬讛 诇讬转 讘讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讗驻拽讬专讜转讗

As it is taught in a baraita: A person should not drink water and give the remaining water to his student, unless he first poured some of it out. And there was an incident involving a certain individual who drank water and did not pour some of it out, and he gave the cup to his student. And that student was a delicate person [istenis], and due to his sensitivity he did not want to drink from the cup, and he died of thirst. At that time, the Sages said: A person should not drink water and give the remaining water to his student unless he first poured some of it out. Rav Ashi said: Therefore, in the case of this student who pours water from the cup that his teacher drank from first, even if he does so in the presence of his teacher, his actions are not prohibited due to disrespect [afkiruta].

讻诇 诪讬诇讬 诇讗 转讬驻诇讜讟 讘讗驻讬 专讘讱 讘专 诪拽专讗 讜讚讬讬住讗 讚讻驻转讬诇讛 砖诇 讗讘专 讚诪讜

With regard to eating, these amora鈥檌m instructed their sons: In the case of anything that you are eating, if the food causes you to salivate and you need to spit out the saliva, do not spit it out in the presence of your teacher, as it is disrespectful, except in the case of a dish of gourd or porridge. If one is eating gourds or porridge he may spit out the saliva even in the presence of his teacher, as the saliva generated by these items is like a molten bar of lead, and refraining from spitting it out would be dangerous.

转谞谉 讛转诐 讗讬砖 讛专 讛讘讬转 讛讬讛 诪讞讝专 注诇 讻诇 诪砖诪专 讜诪砖诪专 讜讗讘讜拽讜转 讚讜诇拽讜转 诇驻谞讬讜 讜讻诇 诪砖诪专 砖讗讬谞讜 注讜诪讚 讜讗讜诪专 诇讜 讗讬砖 讛专 讛讘讬转

We learned in a mishna elsewhere (Middot 1:2): The man [ish] in charge of overseeing the watches of the Temple Mount would circulate nightly among each and every watch post, to ascertain that the watchmen were awake and performing their duty properly. And there were lit torches carried before him, so that the watchmen would see him approaching. And at every watch post where the watchman would not stand up, the man would test whether the watchman was sleeping; and the man of the Temple Mount would say to him:

Scroll To Top