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

Today's Daf Yomi

April 24, 2021 | 讬状讘 讘讗讬讬专 转砖驻状讗

Masechet Yoma is sponsored by Vicky Harari in commemoration of her father's Yahrzeit, Avraham Baruch Hacohen ben Zeev Eliyahu Eckstein z'l, a Holocaust survivor and a feminist before it was fashionable. And in gratitude to Michelle Cohen Farber for revolutionizing women's learning worldwide.
  • 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)

Yoma 13

Do we hold like Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Yosi in their debate regarding the situation of the Kohen who replaces the Kohen Gadol when the original Kohen Gadol comes back to his job? On what issues does Rabbi Yosi agree with Rabbi Meir? The gemara delves into the back and forth discussion in the mishna between Rabbi Yehuda and the rabbis regarding a replacement wife for the Kohen Gadol in case his wife were to die. Why do the rabbis distinguish between a replacement wife and a replacement Kohen? On what basis does Rabbi Yehuda disagree with them? The gemara concludes that according to Rabbi Yehuda, the extra wife must marry the Kohen Gadol 鈥 how can this work as it can be derived from the verse that he is to have only one wife on Yom Kippur? The gemara concludes that he gives her a divorce document (a get) with a condition (it will be a get, if鈥). After a lot of trial and error, the gemara determines exactly what the condition needs to be and also concludes that both wives receive a conditional get. Why isn鈥檛 the same derivation used by a yevama (one who needs to do levirate marriage) to exclude one who had multiple wives? The rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda have a debate regarding a Kohen Gadol who becomes an onen (when a close relative dies until the burial). He is allowed to work in the Temple but cannot eat sacrificial meat. But if he is not in the Temple at the time do they bring him to the Temple?

讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜诪讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 砖讗诐 注讘专 讜注讘讚 注讘讜讚转讜 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜诪讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 砖讗诐 诪转 专讗砖讜谉 砖讞讜讝专 诇注讘讜讚转讜

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.

驻砖讬讟讗 诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 讛讜讬讗 诇讬讛 爪专讛 诪讞讬讬诐 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

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.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗祝 讗砖讛 讗讞专转 诪转拽讬谞讬谉 诇讜 讜专讘谞谉 谞诪讬 讛讗 讞讬讬砖讬 诇砖诪讗 讗诪专讬 诇讱 专讘谞谉 讟讜诪讗讛 砖讻讬讞讗 诪讬转讛 诇讗 砖讻讬讞讗

搂 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鈥檛 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.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 讗讬谉 诇讚讘专 住讜祝 砖驻讬专 拽讗 讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诇讱 诇诪讬转讛 讚讞讚讗 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 诇诪讬转讛 讚转专转讬 诇讗 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 讜专讘谞谉 讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬讞砖 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讬转讛 讚转专讬谉 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉

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.

讜专讘谞谉 谞讬诪专讜 讗讬谞讛讜 诇谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讗诪专讬 诇讱 专讘谞谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讝专讬讝 讛讜讗 讗讬 讝专讬讝 讛讜讗 诇诪讛 诪转拽讬谞讬谉 讻讛谉 讗讞专 讻讬讜谉 讚注讘讚讬谞谉 诇讬讛 爪专讛 讻诇 砖讻谉 讚诪讝讚专讝 讟驻讬

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.

讜诪讬 住讙讬 诇讬讛 讘转拽谞转讗 讘讬转讜 讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 讜讛讱 诇讗讜 讘讬转讜 讛讬讗 讚诪拽讚砖 诇讛 讜讛讗 讻诪讛 讚诇讗 讻谞讬住 诇讛 诇讗讜 讘讬转讜 讛讬讗 讚讻谞讬住 诇讛 讗诐 讻谉 讛讜讛 诇讬讛 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐 讜专讞诪谞讗 讗诪专 讜讻驻专 讘注讚讜 讜讘注讚 讘讬转讜 讜诇讗 讘注讚 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐

搂 The Gemara asks with regard to Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 opinion: And is designation of a second wife sufficient for him? The Merciful One stated in the Torah: 鈥淎nd he shall make atonement for himself and for his house鈥 (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: 鈥淎nd he shall make atonement for himself and for his house鈥 (Leviticus 16:11). He atones for one house and not for two houses.

讚讛讚专 诪讙专砖 诇讛 讗讬 诪讙专砖 诇讛 讛讚专讗 拽讜砖讬讬谉 诇讚讜讻转讗 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 讚诪讙专砖 诇讛 注诇 转谞讗讬 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖转诪讜转讬 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诇讗 诪讬讬转讗 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐

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.

讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转] 砖诇讗 转诪讜转讬 讗讬 诇讗 诪讬转讛 诪讬讙专砖讗 诇讛 讜讗讬 诪讬转讛 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讱 讜讚讬诇诪讗 讛讬讗 诇讗 诪讬转讛 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗讬 讙讬讟讗 讜诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讜拽诐 诇讬讛 讘诇讗 讘讬转

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鈥檛 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.

讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 注诇 诪谞转 砖转诪讜转 [讗讞转 诪讻诐] 诪讬转讛 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讱 诪讬转讛 讛讱 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诇讗 诪讬讬转讗 讜诇讗 讞讚讗 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐

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鈥檛 this one alive? The Gemara asks: And perhaps neither one of them will die, and he will then have two houses.

讜注讜讚 讻讬 讛讗讬 讙讜讜谞讗 诪讬 讛讜讬 讙讬讟讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讗 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转砖转讬 讬讬谉 讻诇 讬诪讬 讞讬讬 讜讞讬讬讻讬 讗讬谉 讝讛 讻专讬转讜转

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鈥檛 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.

讻诇 讬诪讬 讞讬讬 驻诇讜谞讬 讛专讬 讝讛 讻专讬转讜转

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.

讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讗讬 诇讗 诪讬转讛 讞讘专转讛 诪讬讙专砖讗 讜讗讬 诪讬转讛 讛讗 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讘驻诇讙讗 讚注讘讜讚讛 讜讗讬讙诇讬 诪诇转讗

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鈥檛 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

诇诪驻专注 讚讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗 诇讗讜 讙讬讟讗 讛讜讗 讜注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 注讘讜讚讛 讘砖谞讬 讘转讬诐 讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗 讙讬讟讗 讜拽诐 诇讬讛 讘诇讗 讘讬转

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.

讗诇讗 讚诪讙专砖 诇讛讜 诇转专讜讬讬讛讜 诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讜诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转讻谞住讬 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诇讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讜诇讗 注讬讬诇讗 讛讬讗 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 讙讬讟讗 讚转专讜讬讬讛讜 讙讬讟讗 讜拽诐 诇讬讛 讘诇讗 讘讬转

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.

讗诇讗 诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讜诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖讗讻谞住 讗谞讬 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讚讗讬 诪讬讬转讗 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 讜讗讬 诪讬讬转讗 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 诪讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专 讚讬诇诪讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讘驻诇讙讗 讚注讘讜讚讛 讜注讘讚 诇讬讛 注讘讜讚讛 诇诪驻专注 讘砖谞讬 讘转讬诐 讗讬 讞讝讬 诇讛 讚拽讗 讘注讬讗 诇诪讬诪转 拽讚讬诐 讗讬讛讜 讜注讬讬诇 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜诪砖讜讬 诇讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗 讙讬讟讗 诇诪驻专注

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.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讗住讬 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 注讜讬专讗 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 砖转讬 讬讘诪讜转 讛讘讗讜转 诪讘讬转 讗讞讚 诇讗 讬转讬讬讘诪讜 讬讘诪转讜 讬讘诪转讜 专讬讘讛

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: 鈥淪o shall it be done to the man that does not build his brother鈥檚 house鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9). One may derive from this: One house, i.e., wife, and not two. The Gemara responds that when the Torah says: 鈥淭hen his yevama shall go up to the gate鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:7), 鈥渁nd his yevama will draw nigh to him鈥 (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.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬谞讗 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 砖专讘讬讛 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讗专讜住讛 诇讗 转转讬讬讘诐 讛讞讜爪讛 诇专讘讜转 讗转 讛讗专讜住讛

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: 鈥淭he wife of the dead shall not be married outside to one not of his kin鈥 (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 岣litza.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪拽专讬讘 讗讜谞谉 讜讗讬谞讜 讗讜讻诇 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 诪讗讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讗 谞爪专讻讛 讗诇讗 诇讛讘讬讗讜 诪转讜讱 讘讬转讜

搂 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鈥檚 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.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讛砖转讗 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗驻讜拽讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诇讬讛 讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 讜诪拽专讬讘 注诇 讙讘讬 讛诪讝讘讞 讜砖诪注 砖诪转 诇讜 诪转 诪谞讬讞 注讘讜讚转讜 讜讬讜爪讗 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讬讙诪讜专 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诪讬讬转讬谞谉 诇讬讛 诪转讜讱 讘讬转讜

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?

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐

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

Masechet Yoma is sponsored by Vicky Harari in commemoration of her father's Yahrzeit, Avraham Baruch Hacohen ben Zeev Eliyahu Eckstein z'l, a Holocaust survivor and a feminist before it was fashionable. And in gratitude to Michelle Cohen Farber for revolutionizing women's learning worldwide.
  • 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

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Yoma 10-16 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

This week we will learn about the laws of Mezuza and if the entrances of the Temple needed mezuzot.聽 We...
talking talmud_square

Yoma 13: The Kohen’s Backup Wife and Conditional Divorce

On the backup wife for the kohen gadol on Yom Kippur (though it is basically rejected as a plan). He...

Yoma 13

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Yoma 13

讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜诪讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 砖讗诐 注讘专 讜注讘讚 注讘讜讚转讜 讻砖专讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜诪讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 砖讗诐 诪转 专讗砖讜谉 砖讞讜讝专 诇注讘讜讚转讜

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.

驻砖讬讟讗 诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 讛讜讬讗 诇讬讛 爪专讛 诪讞讬讬诐 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

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.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗祝 讗砖讛 讗讞专转 诪转拽讬谞讬谉 诇讜 讜专讘谞谉 谞诪讬 讛讗 讞讬讬砖讬 诇砖诪讗 讗诪专讬 诇讱 专讘谞谉 讟讜诪讗讛 砖讻讬讞讗 诪讬转讛 诇讗 砖讻讬讞讗

搂 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鈥檛 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.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 讗讬谉 诇讚讘专 住讜祝 砖驻讬专 拽讗 讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 诇讱 诇诪讬转讛 讚讞讚讗 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 诇诪讬转讛 讚转专转讬 诇讗 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉 讜专讘谞谉 讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬讞砖 讗驻讬诇讜 诇诪讬转讛 讚转专讬谉 讞讬讬砖讬谞谉

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.

讜专讘谞谉 谞讬诪专讜 讗讬谞讛讜 诇谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讗诪专讬 诇讱 专讘谞谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讝专讬讝 讛讜讗 讗讬 讝专讬讝 讛讜讗 诇诪讛 诪转拽讬谞讬谉 讻讛谉 讗讞专 讻讬讜谉 讚注讘讚讬谞谉 诇讬讛 爪专讛 讻诇 砖讻谉 讚诪讝讚专讝 讟驻讬

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.

讜诪讬 住讙讬 诇讬讛 讘转拽谞转讗 讘讬转讜 讗诪专 专讞诪谞讗 讜讛讱 诇讗讜 讘讬转讜 讛讬讗 讚诪拽讚砖 诇讛 讜讛讗 讻诪讛 讚诇讗 讻谞讬住 诇讛 诇讗讜 讘讬转讜 讛讬讗 讚讻谞讬住 诇讛 讗诐 讻谉 讛讜讛 诇讬讛 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐 讜专讞诪谞讗 讗诪专 讜讻驻专 讘注讚讜 讜讘注讚 讘讬转讜 讜诇讗 讘注讚 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐

搂 The Gemara asks with regard to Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 opinion: And is designation of a second wife sufficient for him? The Merciful One stated in the Torah: 鈥淎nd he shall make atonement for himself and for his house鈥 (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: 鈥淎nd he shall make atonement for himself and for his house鈥 (Leviticus 16:11). He atones for one house and not for two houses.

讚讛讚专 诪讙专砖 诇讛 讗讬 诪讙专砖 诇讛 讛讚专讗 拽讜砖讬讬谉 诇讚讜讻转讗 诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 讚诪讙专砖 诇讛 注诇 转谞讗讬 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖转诪讜转讬 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诇讗 诪讬讬转讗 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐

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.

讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转] 砖诇讗 转诪讜转讬 讗讬 诇讗 诪讬转讛 诪讬讙专砖讗 诇讛 讜讗讬 诪讬转讛 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讱 讜讚讬诇诪讗 讛讬讗 诇讗 诪讬转讛 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗讬 讙讬讟讗 讜诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讜拽诐 诇讬讛 讘诇讗 讘讬转

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鈥檛 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.

讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 注诇 诪谞转 砖转诪讜转 [讗讞转 诪讻诐] 诪讬转讛 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讱 诪讬转讛 讛讱 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诇讗 诪讬讬转讗 讜诇讗 讞讚讗 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 砖谞讬 讘转讬诐

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鈥檛 this one alive? The Gemara asks: And perhaps neither one of them will die, and he will then have two houses.

讜注讜讚 讻讬 讛讗讬 讙讜讜谞讗 诪讬 讛讜讬 讙讬讟讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讗 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转砖转讬 讬讬谉 讻诇 讬诪讬 讞讬讬 讜讞讬讬讻讬 讗讬谉 讝讛 讻专讬转讜转

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鈥檛 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.

讻诇 讬诪讬 讞讬讬 驻诇讜谞讬 讛专讬 讝讛 讻专讬转讜转

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.

讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讗讬 诇讗 诪讬转讛 讞讘专转讛 诪讬讙专砖讗 讜讗讬 诪讬转讛 讛讗 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讘驻诇讙讗 讚注讘讜讚讛 讜讗讬讙诇讬 诪诇转讗

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鈥檛 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

诇诪驻专注 讚讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗 诇讗讜 讙讬讟讗 讛讜讗 讜注讘讬讚 诇讬讛 注讘讜讚讛 讘砖谞讬 讘转讬诐 讗诇讗 讚讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗 讙讬讟讗 讜拽诐 诇讬讛 讘诇讗 讘讬转

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.

讗诇讗 讚诪讙专砖 诇讛讜 诇转专讜讬讬讛讜 诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讜诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转讻谞住讬 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜讚讬诇诪讗 诇讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讜诇讗 注讬讬诇讗 讛讬讗 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜讛讜讛 诇讬讛 讙讬讟讗 讚转专讜讬讬讛讜 讙讬讟讗 讜拽诐 诇讬讛 讘诇讗 讘讬转

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.

讗诇讗 诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖诇讗 转诪讜转 讞讘专转讬讱 讜诇讞讚讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讬讟讬讱 注诇 诪谞转 砖讗讻谞住 讗谞讬 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讚讗讬 诪讬讬转讗 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 讜讗讬 诪讬讬转讗 讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 讛讗 诪讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专 讚讬诇诪讗 诪讬讬转讗 讞讘专转讛 讘驻诇讙讗 讚注讘讜讚讛 讜注讘讚 诇讬讛 注讘讜讚讛 诇诪驻专注 讘砖谞讬 讘转讬诐 讗讬 讞讝讬 诇讛 讚拽讗 讘注讬讗 诇诪讬诪转 拽讚讬诐 讗讬讛讜 讜注讬讬诇 诇讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讜诪砖讜讬 诇讙讬讟讗 讚讛讗 讙讬讟讗 诇诪驻专注

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.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘 讗住讬 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 注讜讬专讗 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 砖转讬 讬讘诪讜转 讛讘讗讜转 诪讘讬转 讗讞讚 诇讗 讬转讬讬讘诪讜 讬讘诪转讜 讬讘诪转讜 专讬讘讛

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: 鈥淪o shall it be done to the man that does not build his brother鈥檚 house鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9). One may derive from this: One house, i.e., wife, and not two. The Gemara responds that when the Torah says: 鈥淭hen his yevama shall go up to the gate鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:7), 鈥渁nd his yevama will draw nigh to him鈥 (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.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬谞讗 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 砖专讘讬讛 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讗专讜住讛 诇讗 转转讬讬讘诐 讛讞讜爪讛 诇专讘讜转 讗转 讛讗专讜住讛

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: 鈥淭he wife of the dead shall not be married outside to one not of his kin鈥 (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 岣litza.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪拽专讬讘 讗讜谞谉 讜讗讬谞讜 讗讜讻诇 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 诪讗讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讗 谞爪专讻讛 讗诇讗 诇讛讘讬讗讜 诪转讜讱 讘讬转讜

搂 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鈥檚 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.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讛砖转讗 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗驻讜拽讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诇讬讛 讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 讜诪拽专讬讘 注诇 讙讘讬 讛诪讝讘讞 讜砖诪注 砖诪转 诇讜 诪转 诪谞讬讞 注讘讜讚转讜 讜讬讜爪讗 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讬讙诪讜专 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诪讬讬转讬谞谉 诇讬讛 诪转讜讱 讘讬转讜

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?

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐

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

Scroll To Top