Yoma 13

הלכה כרבי יוסי ומודה רבי יוסי שאם עבר ועבד עבודתו כשרה אמר רב יהודה אמר רב הלכה כרבי יוסי ומודה רבי יוסי שאם מת ראשון שחוזר לעבודתו

The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei that the original High Priest returns to his service, while the second is fit to serve neither as High Priest nor as a common priest. And Rabbi Yosei concedes that if the second priest violated this provision and served as High Priest wearing eight garments, his service is valid. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Yosei conceded that if the original High Priest dies, the second returns to his service as High Priest.

פשיטא מהו דתימא הויא ליה צרה מחיים קא משמע לן

The Gemara asks: That is obvious. Clearly, the second priest may serve as High Priest after the first one dies without concern that their rivalry will generate hatred between them. The Gemara answers: Lest you say that the mere knowledge that another priest is in waiting to replace him is enough to generate hatred, and would be for him like a woman whose husband has taken a rival wife in her lifetime; therefore, Rav teaches us that this is not a concern.

רבי יהודה אומר אף אשה אחרת מתקינין לו ורבנן נמי הא חיישי לשמא אמרי לך רבנן טומאה שכיחא מיתה לא שכיחא

§ It was taught in the mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says: The Sages would even designate another wife for the High Priest lest his wife die. The Rabbis say: There is no concern lest his wife die, and therefore the Sages did not designate another wife for him. The Gemara asks with regard to the Rabbis: Aren’t they concerned lest he become impure, which is why the Sages designate a replacement High Priest? Why then, are they not concerned lest his wife die? The Gemara answers that the Rabbis could have said to you: Impurity is common, as it is not unusual for the High Priest to become impure either due to secretions from his body or from an external source. Death is not common, and therefore there is no concern lest his wife die.

אמרו לו אם כן אין לדבר סוף שפיר קא אמרי ליה לרבי יהודה ורבי יהודה אמר לך למיתה דחדא חיישינן למיתה דתרתי לא חיישינן ורבנן אי איכא למיחש אפילו למיתה דתרין חיישינן

It was taught in the mishna that the Rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: If so, that you are concerned lest his wife die, there is no end to the matter. You should also be concerned lest the second wife die, requiring designation of a third and even a fourth wife. The Gemara comments: The Rabbis spoke well to Rabbi Yehuda, making a good point. What can Rabbi Yehuda respond? Rabbi Yehuda could have said to you: For the potential death of one wife, we are concerned; for the potential death of two wives, we are not concerned, as the likelihood of that happening is negligible. The Gemara asks: And what would the Rabbis respond to that contention? They would say: If there is reason to be concerned for a potential death, then even for the potential death of two wives, we are concerned.

ורבנן נימרו אינהו לנפשייהו אמרי לך רבנן כהן גדול זריז הוא אי זריז הוא למה מתקינין כהן אחר כיון דעבדינן ליה צרה כל שכן דמזדרז טפי

The Gemara suggests: If according to the Rabbis there is no distinction between concern that one wife might die and concern that two wives might die, let them say the same with regard to their own opinion. Just as they designate a replacement lest the High Priest become impure, they should designate a second replacement lest the first replacement also become impure. The Gemara answers that the Rabbis could have said to you: The High Priest is vigilant in avoiding impurity. No amount of vigilance can prevent death. The Gemara asks: If he is vigilant in avoiding impurity, then why do the Sages designate another priest in his stead? The reason for the designation of the replacement is that once we establish a replacement as a rival, all the more so will the High Priest be even more vigilant in avoiding impurity to maintain his position.

ומי סגי ליה בתקנתא ביתו אמר רחמנא והך לאו ביתו היא דמקדש לה והא כמה דלא כניס לה לאו ביתו היא דכניס לה אם כן הוה ליה שני בתים ורחמנא אמר וכפר בעדו ובעד ביתו ולא בעד שני בתים

§ The Gemara asks with regard to Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion: And is designation of a second wife sufficient for him? The Merciful One stated in the Torah: “And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house” (Leviticus 16:11). House means wife; and this designated woman is not his wife as they are not yet married. What purpose does designation serve if his wife dies on Yom Kippur? The Gemara answers: He betroths her before Yom Kippur. The Gemara asks: But that does not solve the problem. As long as he has not married her, she is not yet his house, i.e., his wife. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda says that not only is a replacement wife designated, but he actually marries her. If so, another problem arises. The High Priest has two houses, and the Merciful One said: “And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house” (Leviticus 16:11). He atones for one house and not for two houses.

דהדר מגרש לה אי מגרש לה הדרא קושיין לדוכתא לא צריכא דמגרש לה על תנאי דאמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת [שתמותי ודילמא לא מייתא והוה ליה שני בתים

The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda says that after marrying the second wife, he then divorces her. The Gemara asks: If he divorces her, our difficulty is restored to its original place. There is no point in designating a second wife, as if the first wife dies, the second woman is not married to him. The Gemara responds: No, it is necessary in a case where he marries her and divorces her provisionally, as he says to her: This is your bill of divorce on condition that you die on Yom Kippur. If she dies on Yom Kippur, then she was divorced retroactively and he has only one wife; if she does not die but the original wife dies, her divorce does not take effect and the second wife is married to the High Priest. In either case, the High Priest has only one wife. The Gemara asks: And perhaps neither she nor the original wife will die, and the High Priest then has two houses on Yom Kippur.

אלא דאמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת] שלא תמותי אי לא מיתה מיגרשא לה ואי מיתה הא קיימא הך ודילמא היא לא מיתה והוה ליה גיטא דהאי גיטא ומייתא חברתה וקם ליה בלא בית

Rather, it is a case where the High Priest said to her, the woman designated: This is your bill of divorce on condition that you will not die on Yom Kippur. If she does not die, then she is divorced and he remains married to the original wife; if she dies, isn’t that original wife alive and he remains married to her alone? The Gemara asks: And perhaps the second one will not die and her bill of divorce will be a valid bill of divorce, meaning she is not his wife, but her counterpart might die, leaving the High Priest without a wife at all on Yom Kippur.

אלא דאמר לה על מנת שתמות [אחת מכם] מיתה הא קיימא הך מיתה הך הא קיימא הא ודילמא לא מייתא ולא חדא מינייהו והוה ליה שני בתים

Rather, it is a case where the High Priest said to her: This is your bill of divorce on condition that one of you dies. If this one dies, that one is alive, and if that one dies, isn’t this one alive? The Gemara asks: And perhaps neither one of them will die, and he will then have two houses.

ועוד כי האי גוונא מי הוי גיטא והאמר רבא הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שלא תשתי יין כל ימי חיי וחייכי אין זה כריתות

And furthermore, the question arises: Is a document of that sort a valid bill of divorce? Does a condition of that sort take effect? But didn’t Rava say: If a man says to his wife: This is your bill of divorce on condition that you will not drink wine for all the days of my life and your life, that is not severance. The bill of divorce in the Torah is called a bill of severance, meaning that for the document to be valid all connections between the husband and wife must be severed. If there is a provision in the document that maintains a permanent connection between the spouses, e.g., not to drink wine for all of her life, the document does not effect a valid divorce.

כל ימי חיי פלוני הרי זה כריתות

However, if one said to his wife: This is your bill of divorce on condition that you will not drink wine during all the days of the life of so-and-so; that is severance. Since the condition is not dependent on her and him but on the life of a third party, it is like any other condition in a divorce. Therefore, in the case of the High Priest, since the divorce takes effect only if neither of the women dies, that is a condition that maintains a relationship between the husband and wife for as long as she lives, which invalidates the divorce.

אלא דאמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שלא תמות חברתיך אי לא מיתה חברתה מיגרשא ואי מיתה הא הא קיימא הא ודילמא מייתא חברתה בפלגא דעבודה ואיגלי מלתא

Rather, it is a case where the High Priest said to the second wife: This is your bill of divorce on condition that your counterpart, the other wife, will not die. If her counterpart, the first woman, does not die, the second woman is divorced; and if the first woman dies, isn’t the second woman alive and not divorced? The Gemara asks: And perhaps her counterpart will die in the middle of the Yom Kippur service, and it will become clear

למפרע דגיטא דהא לאו גיטא הוא ועביד ליה עבודה בשני בתים אלא דאמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שתמות חברתיך ודילמא מייתא חברתה והוה ליה גיטא דהא גיטא וקם ליה בלא בית

retroactively that the bill of divorce of this second woman is not a valid bill of divorce, since the first wife died. In that case, it turns out retroactively that he performed part of the service with two houses, married to two wives. Rather, it is a case where the High Priest said to the second wife: This is your bill of divorce on condition that your counterpart dies. The Gemara asks: In this case, too, perhaps her counterpart will die and the bill of divorce of this second woman is a valid bill of divorce, and he will remain without a house at all.

אלא דמגרש להו לתרוייהו לחדא אמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שלא תמות חברתיך ולחדא אמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שלא תכנסי לבית הכנסת ודילמא לא מייתא חברתה ולא עיילא היא לבית הכנסת והוה ליה גיטא דתרוייהו גיטא וקם ליה בלא בית

Rather, this is a case where he divorces both of them provisionally, with a different stipulation to each woman. To one, he says: This is your bill of divorce on condition that your counterpart will not die. And to the other one, he says: This is your bill of divorce on condition that you will not enter the synagogue on Yom Kippur, cognizant of the fact that she can easily fulfill that condition and thereby effect her divorce. The Gemara asks: And perhaps her counterpart will not die, fulfilling the condition and effecting the divorce of one wife; and she will not enter the synagogue, fulfilling the condition and effecting the divorce of the other wife. In that case the bill of divorce of both women is a valid bill of divorce and he remains without a wife.

אלא לחדא אמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שלא תמות חברתיך ולחדא אמר לה הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שאכנס אני לבית הכנסת דאי מייתא הא קיימא הא ואי מייתא הא קיימא הא מאי איכא למימר דילמא מייתא חברתה בפלגא דעבודה ועבד ליה עבודה למפרע בשני בתים אי חזי לה דקא בעיא למימת קדים איהו ועייל לבית הכנסת ומשוי לגיטא דהא גיטא למפרע

Rather, it is a case where to one of the women, the High Priest says: This is your bill of divorce on condition that your counterpart does not die. And to the other one of the women he says: This is your bill of divorce on condition that I will enter the synagogue. If this wife dies, that other one is alive; and if that other one dies, this one is alive. What is there to say in refuting this possibility? Perhaps her counterpart will die in the middle of the service, and it will turn out retroactively that he performed part of the service with two houses, married to two wives. If he sees that she seeks, i.e., she is about to die, he will then preemptively enter the synagogue, rendering the bill of divorce of the dying wife a valid bill of divorce retroactively. He will then be married to only one woman. In that way, a second wife can be designated for the High Priest without him being married to two women on Yom Kippur.

מתקיף לה רב אסי ואיתימא רב עוירא אלא מעתה שתי יבמות הבאות מבית אחד לא יתייבמו יבמתו יבמתו ריבה

Rav Asi, and some say it was Rav Avira, strongly objects to that conclusion: However, if that is so, that from the term: His house, in the singular, one derives one wife and not two, then two widows of a brother who died without a child [yevamot] who come from one house, i.e., they were married to the same man, should not be obligated to marry his brother in levirate marriage. In addressing levirate marriage, the Torah says: “So shall it be done to the man that does not build his brother’s house” (Deuteronomy 25:9). One may derive from this: One house, i.e., wife, and not two. The Gemara responds that when the Torah says: “Then his yevama shall go up to the gate” (Deuteronomy 25:7), “and his yevama will draw nigh to him” (Deuteronomy 25:9), twice, it comes to include a situation where the deceased had two wives; in that case one of them is required to marry his brother in levirate marriage.

מתקיף לה רבינא ואיתימא רב שרביה אלא מעתה ארוסה לא תתייבם החוצה לרבות את הארוסה

Ravina, and some say it was Rav Sherevya, strongly objects to this: It was stated above that a woman betrothed to the High Priest is not considered his house, i.e., his wife. However, if that is so, a betrothed woman whose betrothed passed away should not be obligated to marry his brother in levirate marriage, since the term: House, appears in that context as well. In practice, that is not the halakha. The Gemara answers that the Torah says: “The wife of the dead shall not be married outside to one not of his kin” (Deuteronomy 25:5). The superfluous term: Outside, comes to include the betrothed woman. Although she is technically still outside the family, the brother of the deceased must either marry her in levirate marriage or perform ḥalitza.

תנו רבנן כהן גדול מקריב אונן ואינו אוכל רבי יהודה אומר כל היום מאי כל היום אמר רבא לא נצרכה אלא להביאו מתוך ביתו

§ Apropos the death of the wife of the High Priest, the Gemara cites an additional baraita. The Sages taught: A High Priest sacrifices offerings when he is an acute mourner, on the day of a relative’s death, but does not eat from those offerings. Rabbi Yehuda says: The entire day. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: The entire day? Rava said: This phrase is necessary only to bring him from his house. Not only is it permitted for the High Priest to serve in the Temple when he is an acute mourner, but it is a mitzva to bring him from his house to serve in the Temple for the entire day to help ease his pain.

אמר ליה אביי השתא לרבי יהודה אפוקי מפקינן ליה דתניא היה עומד ומקריב על גבי המזבח ושמע שמת לו מת מניח עבודתו ויוצא דברי רבי יהודה רבי יוסי אומר יגמור ואת אמרת מייתינן ליה מתוך ביתו

Abaye said to him: Now, according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, we remove the High Priest from the Temple when he is an acute mourner, as it was taught in a baraita: If a common priest was standing and sacrificing an offering on top of the altar and heard that a relative of his died, he leaves his service in the middle and exits the Temple; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: He completes the service and then leaves. Rabbi Yehuda rules stringently in the case of a priest who is an acute mourner sacrificing an offering. Even though the baraita is referring to a common priest, it is reasonable to say that the same is true with regard to a High Priest as well. Rabbi Yehuda says that a High Priest who becomes an acute mourner exits the Temple, and you say we bring the High Priest who is an acute mourner from his house to serve?

אלא אמר רבא מאי כל היום

Rather, Rava said: The initial interpretation must be rejected. What is the meaning of the phrase: The entire day?