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

Today's Daf Yomi

April 15, 2021 | 讙壮 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 shiurim are sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island group in memory of Irwin Weber a鈥漢, Yitzchak Dov ben Avraham Alter and Rachel, beloved father of our member Debbie Weber Schreiber.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Yoma 4

Our learning today will be in honor of the State of Israel celebrating 73 years of independence. And in honor of Dr. Haya Shames who was chosen to light a beacon at the Independence Day ceremony of Neve Daniel, a beacon representing Torah study and more specifically Daf Yomi learning. Haya is a Dr. of Neuro Optometry and mother of six. She has lead many women to their Daf Yomi journey, has completed the Shas and is now in her second cycle. Yasher Koach! And by Bracha Rutner in memory of her mother, Anna Rutner – Sara bat Yom Tov. “She was the kindest person and curious about the world. When you spoke to her she gave you her full attention and asked you questions about your life and made you feel special. She loved learning, people and her family.” And for a refuah shleima for Bosmat bat Yardena.

The gemara delves into the two different approaches to the derivation for the 7 days of separation of the Kohen Gadol before Yom Kippur 鈥 either from the inauguration days or from the giving of the Torah. Questions are raised and braitot are brought to prove each side. How does the debate regarding the verses from Shmot 24 about Moshe going into the cloud relate to this. Was that event before or after the giving of the Torah. Was the Torah given on the 6th of Sivan or the 7th? Was the cloud mentioned in Shmot 24 covering Moshe or the mountain? Were the six days leading up to the receiving of the Torah or was it after the Torah was received and it was before Moshe was to speak to God to learn the rest of the Torah?

诇讟讜诪讗转 讘讬转讜

about the ritual impurity of the priest鈥檚 home, i.e., his wife. This is done lest he become impure through relations with a menstruating woman, which is ritual impurity lasting seven days. Therefore, he is removed from his home for seven days.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讘砖诇诪讗 诇讚讬讚讬 讚讬诇驻讬谞讗 诪诪诇讜讗讬诐 讛讬讬谞讜 讚转谞讬讗 讝讛 讜讝讛 诪讝讬谉 注诇讬讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 诪讻诇 讞讟讗讜转 砖讛讬讜 砖诐 讚讛讜讗讬 谞诪讬 讛讝讗讛 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讚讬讚讱 讚讬诇驻转 诪住讬谞讬 讛讝讗讛 讘住讬谞讬 诪讬 讛讜讗讬

Rabbi Yo岣nan said to Reish Lakish: Granted, according to my opinion, that I derive the halakha of sequestering from the inauguration, that explains that which is taught in the baraita: With regard to both this priest engaged in the burning of the red heifer and that High Priest prior to Yom Kippur, one sprinkles upon him for all seven days the purification water mixed with ashes from samples from all the previous red heifer sin-offerings that were safeguarded there in the Temple. The reason for this practice is that there was also sprinkling during the inauguration. However, according to your opinion, that you derive it from Sinai, was there in fact sprinkling at Sinai? According to your opinion, why are the priests sprinkled?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜诇讟注诪讬讱 诪讬 谞讬讞讗 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讚诐 讛讻讗 诪讬诐 讛讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讚转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 谞讻谞住讜 诪讬诐 转讞转 讚诐 讗诇讗 诇讚讬讚讱 讛讝讗讛 讘住讬谞讬 诪讬 讛讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪注诇讛 讘注诇诪讗

Reish Lakish said to him: And according to your reasoning, does it work out well? At the inauguration, the sprinkling was with blood; here, the sprinkling was with water. Rabbi Yo岣nan answered: That is not difficult, as Rabbi 岣yya taught: Water replaced blood, but both have the status of sprinkling. However, according to your reasoning, at Sinai, was there sprinkling at all? Reish Lakish said to him: The Sages merely established a higher standard, and this sprinkling is not a requirement.

转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讝讗转 讬讘讗 讗讛专谉 讗诇 讛拽讚砖 讘诪讛 砖讗诪讜专 讘注谞讬谉 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讘注谞讬谉 讚诪诇讜讗讬诐 讜诪讛 讗诪讜专 讘注谞讬谉 讚诪诇讜讗讬诐 讗讛专谉 驻讬专砖 砖讘注讛 讜砖诪砖 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讜诪砖讛 诪住专 诇讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讻讚讬 诇讞谞讻讜 讘注讘讜讚讛

搂 The Gemara comments: A baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan that the sequestering is derived from the inauguration; and a baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Reish Lakish that it is derived from Sinai. The Gemara elaborates: A baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan: It was stated with regard to the inauguration: 鈥淲ith this Aaron will come into the Sanctuary, with a young bull for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering鈥 (Leviticus 16:3). To what is the term: With this, referring? It is referring to that which is stated in the matter. What is the matter? It is the matter of the inauguration. In the manner that the priest was prepared for the inauguration, so too is he prepared for Yom Kippur. And what is stated in the matter of the inauguration? It is that Aaron the priest withdrew for seven days and served one day, and Moses transmitted the Torah guidelines to him all seven days in order to train him in the Sanctuary service.

讜讗祝 诇讚讜专讜转 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 驻讜专砖 砖讘注讛 讜诪砖诪砖 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讜砖谞讬 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 诪转诇诪讬讚讬讜 砖诇 诪砖讛 诇讗驻讜拽讬 爪讚讜拽讬谉 诪讜住专讬谉 诇讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讻讚讬 诇讞谞讻讜 讘注讘讜讚讛

And throughout the generations as well, the High Priest withdraws seven days prior to Yom Kippur and serves one day. And two Torah scholars from among the students of Moses, to the exclusion of Sadducees, who are not students of Moses, transmit the Torah guidelines to him all seven days in order to train him in the Sanctuary service.

诪讻讗谉 讗诪专讜 砖讘注转 讬诪讬诐 拽讜讚诐 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 诪驻专讬砖讬谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪讘讬转讜 诇诇砖讻转 驻专讛讚专讬谉 讜讻砖诐 砖诪驻专讬砖讬谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讻讱 诪驻专讬砖讬谉 讻讛谉 讛砖讜专祝 讗转 讛驻专讛 诇诇砖讻讛 砖注诇 驻谞讬 讛讘讬专讛 爪驻讜谞讛 诪讝专讞讛 讜讗讞讚 讝讛 讜讗讞讚 讝讛 诪讝讬谉 注诇讬讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 诪讻诇 讞讟讗讜转 砖讛讬讜 砖诐

From there the Sages said in the mishna: Seven days prior to Yom Kippur the Sages would remove the High Priest, who performs the entire Yom Kippur service, from his house to the Chamber of Parhedrin; and just as the Sages would remove the High Priest, so do they remove the priest who burns the heifer, from his house to the chamber that was before the bira at the northeast corner of the courtyard on the Temple Mount. And with regard to both this priest whom the Sages sequester prior to Yom Kippur and that priest whom the Sages sequester prior to engaging in the burning of the heifer, one sprinkles upon him, for all seven days of sequestering, the purification water with ashes from all the previous red heifer sin-offerings that were safeguarded there in the Temple.

讜讗诐 转讗诪专 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讚诐 讛讻讗 诪讬诐 讗诪专转 谞讻谞住讜 诪讬诐 转讞转 讚诐 讜讗讜诪专 讻讗砖专 注砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛讝讛 爪讜讛 讛壮 诇注砖讜转 诇讻驻专 注诇讬讻诐 诇注砖讜转 讗诇讜 诪注砖讛 驻专讛 诇讻驻专 讗诇讜 诪注砖讛 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐

And if you say that at the inauguration the sprinkling was with blood, and here the sprinkling was with water, you said: Water replaced blood. And it says in the verse: 鈥淎s has been done this day, so the Lord has commanded to do, to make atonement for you鈥 (Leviticus 8:34). To do, these are the actions performed in the burning of the red heifer; to make atonement, these are the actions performed on Yom Kippur. This baraita, then, is proof for the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan.

讜讛讗讬 讘讝讗转 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇讙讜驻讬讛 讘驻专 讘谉 讘拽专 诇讞讟讗转 讜讗讬诇 诇注讜诇讛 讗诪专讬 讗讬 诇拽专讘谉 诇讞讜讚讬讛 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 讘讝讛 讗讜 讘讗诇讛 诪讗讬 讘讝讗转 砖诪注转 诪讬谞讛 转专转讬

The Gemara analyzes the baraita. But the term: With this [bezot], is required for the meaning of the verse itself; the priest is required to bring a young bull for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering. The Sages say in response: If the term comes to teach only with regard to the offerings, let the verse say: With this [bezeh], in the masculine, referring to the bull, or: With these [be鈥檈lleh], referring to the bull and the ram. What, then, may be derived from the use of the feminine term bezot, which refers to neither the bull nor the ram? Learn from it two conclusions; one with regard to the offerings and one with regard to sequestering.

诪讗讬 讜讗讜诪专 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 拽诪讗 讛讜讗 讚讘注讬 驻专讬砖讛 讻讚讗砖讻讞谉 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讗讘诇 讘讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 讚注诇诪讗 诇讗 讗讬 谞诪讬 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 拽诪讗 讛讜讗 讚讘注讬 驻专讬砖讛 讗讘诇 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讘注诇诪讗 诇讗 转讗 砖诪注 讻讗砖专 注砖讛 讜讻讜壮

The Gemara continues its analysis of the baraita. What is the meaning of the term: And it says? Why does the baraita cite an additional proof from another verse? Why wasn鈥檛 the first proof sufficient? And if you say that it is on the first Yom Kippur when Aaron performed the service that the High Priest requires sequestering, as we find in the inauguration when the priests were sequestered before being consecrated as priests, but on Yom Kippur in general, no, subsequent High Priests do not require sequestering; or alternatively, if you say: It is the first High Priest who requires sequestering, as did all the priests during the inauguration, but subsequent High Priests in general, no, they do not require sequestering before Yom Kippur; then come and hear that which it says in the verse: 鈥淎s has been done this day, so the Lord has commanded to do,鈥 meaning that this is a mitzva for all generations.

转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诪砖讛 注诇讛 讘注谞谉 讜谞转讻住讛 讘注谞谉 讜谞转拽讚砖 讘注谞谉 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 转讜专讛 诇讬砖专讗诇 讘拽讚讜砖讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 注诇 讛专 住讬谞讬 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讗讞专 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 砖讛讬讜 转讞诇讛 诇讗专讘注讬诐 讬讜诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬

搂 And a baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Reish Lakish that sequestering is derived from Sinai: Moses ascended in the cloud, and was covered in the cloud, and was sanctified in the cloud, in order to receive the Torah for the Jewish people in sanctity, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai and the cloud covered him six days, and He called to Moses on the seventh day from the midst of the cloud鈥 (Exodus 24:16). This was an incident that occurred after the revelation of the Ten Commandments to the Jewish people, and these six days were the beginning of the forty days that Moses was on the mountain (see Exodus 24:18); this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. The opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili corresponds to that of Reish Lakish; Moses withdrew for six days before receiving permission to stand in the presence of God.

专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 诪专讗砖 讞讜讚砖

Rabbi Akiva says: This incident occurred before the revelation of the Ten Commandments to the Jewish people, and when the Torah says: 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai,鈥 it is referring to the revelation of the Divine Presence that began on the New Moon of Sivan, which was six days before the revelation of the Ten Commandments.

讜讬讻住讛讜 讛注谞谉 诇讛专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 [诪砖讛] 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 注讜诪讚讬谉 讜诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇讞诇拽 讻讘讜讚 诇诪砖讛 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇诪专拽 讗讻讬诇讛 讜砖转讬讛 砖讘诪注讬讜 诇砖讜诪讜 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转

And that which is written: 鈥淎nd the cloud covered him,鈥 means the cloud covered it, the mountain, and not him, Moses. 鈥淎nd He called toMoses鈥; Moses and all of the Jewish people were standing at the foot of the mountain and listening, and if God did not mean that Moses was to climb the mountain, why did He call him? The verse comes only to accord deference to Moses, as the entire nation heard God address him. Rabbi Natan says: Moses was in fact called to enter the cloud; however, his entrance was not for the purpose of sequestering and purifying him, rather, the verse comes only to cleanse the food and drink that was in his intestines, to render him like the ministering angels who require neither food nor drink.

专讘讬 诪转讬讗 讘谉 讞专砖 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇讗讬讬诐 注诇讬讜 讻讚讬 砖转讛讗 转讜专讛 谞讬转谞转 讘讗讬诪讛 讘专转转 讜讘讝讬注 砖谞讗诪专 注讘讚讜 讗转 讛壮 讘讬专讗讛 讜讙讬诇讜 讘专注讚讛 诪讗讬 讜讙讬诇讜 讘专注讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 诪转谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讘诪拽讜诐 讙讬诇讛 砖诐 转讛讗 专注讚讛

Rabbi Matya ben 岣rash says: The verse calling Moses into the cloud comes only to intimidate Moses, to instill in him a sense of awe of the Creator, so that the Torah would be delivered with reverence, with quaking and with trembling, as it is stated: 鈥淪erve the Lord with awe, and rejoice with trembling鈥 (Psalms 2:11). Apropos the end of the verse, the Gemara asks: What is the meaning of 鈥渁nd rejoice with trembling鈥? Joy and trembling seem contradictory. Rav Adda bar Mattana said that Rav said: Where there is the joy of fulfilling a mitzva, there will be the trembling of the awe of Heaven there.

讘诪讗讬 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讜专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讘驻诇讜讙转讗 讚讛谞讬 转谞讗讬 讚转谞讬讗 讘砖砖讛 讘讞讜讚砖 谞讬转谞讛 转讜专讛 诇讬砖专讗诇 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘砖讘注讛 讘讜 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖砖讛 讘砖砖讛 谞讬转谞讛 讜讘砖讘注讛 注诇讛 (讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬) 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖讘注讛 讘砖讘注讛 谞讬转谞讛 讜讘砖讘注讛 注诇讛 [讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬]

搂 Apropos the interpretation of the verse with regard to revelation, the Gemara asks: With regard to what do Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva disagree? The Gemara explains that their dispute is parallel to the dispute between these other tanna鈥檌m, as it was taught in a baraita: On the sixth day of the month of Sivan, the Torah, the Ten Commandments, was given to the Jewish people. Rabbi Yosei says: It was on the seventh day of the month. According to the one who said that it was on the sixth, the Torah was given on the sixth, which is the day of the revelation of the Ten Commandments, and on the seventh day of the month Moses ascended the mountain, as it is written: 鈥淎nd He called to Moses on the seventh day鈥 (Exodus 24:16). According to the one who said that the Torah was given on the seventh of the month, it was given on the seventh and Moses ascended on the seventh, as it is written: 鈥淎nd he called to Moses on the seventh day.鈥

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 住讘专 诇讛 讻转谞讗 拽诪讗 讚讗诪专 讘砖砖讛 讘讞讜讚砖 谞讬转谞讛 转讜专讛 讛诇讻讱 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讗讞专 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 注诇 讛专 住讬谞讬 讜讬讻住讛讜 讛注谞谉 砖砖转 讬诪讬诐 诇诪砖讛 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 砖讗专 转讜专讛 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 诪专讗砖 讞讜讚砖 讜讬讻住讛讜 讛注谞谉 诇讛专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 讛讗 拽讘讬诇讜 诇讛讜 诪砖砖讛 讜讛讗 讗住转诇拽 注谞谉 诪砖砖讛

The Gemara proceeds to link the two disputes. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili holds in accordance with the opinion of the first tanna in the baraita, who said that it was on the sixth of the month that the Torah was given; therefore, this incident occurred after the revelation of the Ten Commandments. That is why he explains the verse 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode on Mount Sinai and the cloud covered him for six days鈥 to mean that the cloud covered Moses, and He called to Moses on the seventh day to receive the rest of the Torah. As, should it enter your mind to interpret the verse as follows: 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode鈥 from the New Moon of Sivan; 鈥淎nd the cloud covered it,鈥 the mountain; 鈥淎nd He called to Moses on the seventh day,鈥 to receive only the Ten Commandments; didn鈥檛 they already receive the Ten Commandments on the sixth of the month, and the cloud that was on the mountain already departed on the sixth of the month?

讜专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 住讘专 诇讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讚讗诪专 讘砖讘注讛 讘讞讚砖 谞讬转谞讛 转讜专讛 诇讬砖专讗诇 讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讚诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讘砖讘注讛 注砖专 讘转诪讜讝 谞砖转讘专讜 讛诇讜讞讜转 注砖专讬谉 讜讗专讘注讛 讚住讬讜谉 讜砖讬转住专 讚转诪讜讝 诪诇讜 诇讛讜 讗专讘注讬谉 讬讜诪讬谉 讚讛讜讛 讘讛专 讜讘砖讘住专 讘转诪讜讝 谞讞讬转 讜讗转讗 讜转讘专讬谞讛讜 诇诇讜讞讜转

And Rabbi Akiva holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who said that on the seventh of the month the Torah was given to the Jewish people. That is why Moses was summoned on the seventh of the month immediately after the revelation of the Ten Commandments. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva that the Torah was given on the seventh of Sivan and Moses then proceeded to climb the mountain and remain there for forty days, that explains the calculation that you find: On the seventeenth of Tammuz the tablets were shattered, according to the standard tradition. How so? Calculate twenty-four days until the end of Sivan and sixteen days of Tammuz; they total the forty days that he was on the mountain. On the seventeenth of Tammuz he descended from the mountain and came and shattered the tablets.

讗诇讗 诇专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讚讗诪专 砖砖讛 讚驻专讬砖讛 讜讗专讘注讬谉 讚讛专 注讚 注砖专讬谉 讜转诇转 讘转诪讜讝 诇讗 讗转讘讜专 诇讜讞讜转 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗专讘注讬谉 讚讛专 讘讛讚讬 砖砖讛 讚驻专讬砖讛

However, according to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, who said: There were six days of sequestering after the Torah was given and an additional forty days that Moses was on the mountain, the tablets were not shattered until the twenty-third of Tammuz, contrary to the standard tradition. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili could have said to you: The forty days that Moses was on the mountain include the six days of sequestering.

讗诪专 诪专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 诪砖讛 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 注讜诪讚讬谉 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 诪砖讛 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 注讜诪讚讬谉 讜诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇讞诇拽 诇讜 讻讘讜讚 诇诪砖讛

The Master said in that baraita cited above that when the Torah says: 鈥淎nd He called to Moses,鈥 it means that Moses and all of the Jewish people were standing and listening. The Gemara suggests that this supports the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar said that when the Torah says: 鈥淎nd He called to Moses,鈥 it means that Moses and all of the Jewish people were standing and listening and the verse comes only to accord deference to Moses. From Rabbi Elazar鈥檚 statement it is clear that all of Israel heard the voice of God.

诪讬转讬讘讬 拽讜诇 诇讜 拽讜诇 讗诇讬讜 诪砖讛 砖诪注 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 诇讗 砖诪注讜 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘住讬谞讬 讛讗 讘讗讛诇 诪讜注讚 讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘拽专讬讗讛 讛讗 讘讚讘讜专

The Gemara raises an objection: The Torah states: 鈥淎nd when Moses went into the Tent of Meeting that He might speak with him, then he heard the voice speaking unto him from above the Ark cover that was upon the Ark of the Testimony, from between the two cherubs; and He spoke unto him鈥 (Numbers 7:89). The Torah could have said: He heard the voice speaking to him; however, instead the verse said: He heard the voice speaking unto him, indicating that the voice reached him alone. Moses alone heard God鈥檚 voice and all of the Jewish people did not hear it. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This case, where everyone heard God鈥檚 voice, was at Sinai. That case, where Moses alone heard God鈥檚 voice, was at the Tent of Meeting. Or if you wish, say instead an alternative resolution. This is not difficult; when God addressed Moses by calling to him, everyone heard; that which God subsequently communicated by speaking, Moses alone heard.

专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 专诪讬 拽专讗讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 专诪讬 讻转讬讘 讜诇讗 讬讻讜诇 诪砖讛 诇讘讗 讗诇 讗讛诇 诪讜注讚 讻讬 砖讻谉 注诇讬讜 讛注谞谉 讜讻转讬讘 讜讬讘讗 诪砖讛 讘转讜讱 讛注谞谉 诪诇诪讚 砖转驻住讜 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇诪砖讛 讜讛讘讬讗讜 讘注谞谉

Rabbi Zerika raised a contradiction between verses before Rabbi Elazar, and some say that Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Elazar raised a contradiction: It is written in one place: 鈥淎nd Moses was not able to enter into the Tent of Meeting because the cloud dwelt on it鈥 (Exodus 40:35), as Moses was unable to enter the cloud. And it is written elsewhere: 鈥淎nd Moses came into the cloud鈥 (Exodus 24:18). This teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, grabbed Moses and brought him into the cloud since he could not enter on his own.

讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 转谞讗 谞讗诪专 讻讗谉 讘转讜讱 讜谞讗诪专 诇讛诇谉 讘转讜讱 讜讬讘讜讗讜 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讘转讜讱 讛讬诐 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 砖讘讬诇 讚讻转讬讘 讜讛诪讬诐 诇讛诐 讞讜诪讛 讗祝 讻讗谉 砖讘讬诇

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: There is a verbal analogy that resolves this contradiction. It is stated here: 鈥淎nd Moses came into the cloud,鈥 and it is stated below, in another verse: 鈥淎nd the children of Israel went into the sea on dry land鈥 (Exodus 14:22); Just as below, there was a path within the sea, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the water was a wall for them鈥 (Exodus 14:22), here too, there was a path through the cloud, but Moses did not actually enter the cloud.

讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讜讬讚讘专 诇诪讛 讛拽讚讬诐 拽专讬讗讛 诇讚讬讘讜专 诇讬诪讚讛 转讜专讛 讚专讱 讗专抓 砖诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗讚诐 讚讘专 诇讞讘讬专讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 拽讜专讛讜 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗讚诐 讚讘专 诇讞讘讬专讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 拽讜专讛讜 诇讗诪专 讗诪专 专讘讬 (诪讜住讬讗 讘专 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 诪住讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 诪讜住讬讗) 专讘讛 诪谞讬讬谉 诇讗讜诪专 讚讘专 诇讞讘讬专讜 砖讛讜讗 讘讘诇 讬讗诪专 注讚 砖讬讗诪专 诇讜 诇讱 讗诪讜专 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讚讘专 讛壮 讗诇讬讜 诪讗讛诇 诪讜注讚 诇讗诪专

The verse says: 鈥淎nd He called unto Moses, and the Lord spoke unto him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying鈥 (Leviticus 1:1). Why does the verse mention calling before speaking, and God did not speak to him at the outset? The Torah is teaching etiquette: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. This supports the opinion of Rabbi 岣nina, as Rabbi 岣nina said: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. With regard to the term concluding the verse: 鈥淪aying,鈥 Rabbi Musya, grandson of Rabbi Masya, said in the name of Rabbi Musya the Great: From where is it derived with regard to one who tells another some matter, that it is incumbent upon the latter not to say it to others until the former explicitly says to him: Go and tell others? As it is stated: 鈥淎nd the Lord spoke to him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying [lemor].鈥 Lemor is a contraction of lo emor, meaning: Do not say. One must be given permission before transmitting information.

诪讻诇诇 讚转专讜讜讬讬讛讜 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 诪诇讜讗讬诐 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 讚讗讬转诪专 诪诇讜讗讬诐 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讞讚 讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讚讘专 讛诪注讻讘 诇讚讜专讜转 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 砖讗讬谉 诪注讻讘 诇讚讜专讜转 讗讬谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉

搂 After digressing to interpret the verses with regard to Mount Sinai, the Gemara resumes its discussion of the statements of Rabbi Yo岣nan and Reish Lakish. Based on the question Reish Lakish addressed to Rabbi Yo岣nan and the fact that Rabbi Yo岣nan accepted the premise of that question, we learn by inference that both maintain that with regard to the inauguration, failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration. As it is stated: Rabbi Yo岣nan and Rabbi 岣nina disagree. One said: Failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration. And one said: A matter that invalidates offerings throughout the generations invalidates the inauguration; a matter that does not invalidate offerings throughout the generations does not invalidate the inauguration.

转住转讬讬诐 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 诪讚拽讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诇拽讬砖 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗讬 诪讛 诪诇讜讗讬诐 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 讜诇讗 拽讗 诪讛讚专 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诪讬讚讬 转住转讬讬诐

Conclude that Rabbi Yo岣nan is the one who said: Failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration. This may be concluded from the fact that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says to Rabbi Yo岣nan: Just as with regard to the inauguration, failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration, so too is the halakha with regard to Yom Kippur, and Rabbi Yo岣nan did not respond and did not say anything, indicating that he agreed. The Gemara states: Conclude that this indeed is the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan.

诪讗讬 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜

The Gemara asks: What is the practical halakhic difference between the opinions of Rabbi Yo岣nan and Rabbi 岣nina?

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 shiurim are sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island group in memory of Irwin Weber a鈥漢, Yitzchak Dov ben Avraham Alter and Rachel, beloved father of our member Debbie Weber Schreiber.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

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 2-9 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

Masechet Yoma describes the events leading up to Yom Kippur and the events of Yom Kippur itself, the holiest day...
talking talmud_square

Yoma 4: Moshe’s Days in the Cloud

A description of Moshe going up to Mount Sinai to get the Torah. What steps did Moshe need to take,...
introduction to yoma by gitta

Introduction to Yoma聽– The Main Structure

Masechet Yoma (literally, 鈥淭he Day鈥) deals with聽 Yom Kippur (YK).聽聽 Structure of the masechet:聽 The masechet is arranged in chronological聽...

Yoma 4

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Yoma 4

诇讟讜诪讗转 讘讬转讜

about the ritual impurity of the priest鈥檚 home, i.e., his wife. This is done lest he become impure through relations with a menstruating woman, which is ritual impurity lasting seven days. Therefore, he is removed from his home for seven days.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讘砖诇诪讗 诇讚讬讚讬 讚讬诇驻讬谞讗 诪诪诇讜讗讬诐 讛讬讬谞讜 讚转谞讬讗 讝讛 讜讝讛 诪讝讬谉 注诇讬讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 诪讻诇 讞讟讗讜转 砖讛讬讜 砖诐 讚讛讜讗讬 谞诪讬 讛讝讗讛 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讚讬讚讱 讚讬诇驻转 诪住讬谞讬 讛讝讗讛 讘住讬谞讬 诪讬 讛讜讗讬

Rabbi Yo岣nan said to Reish Lakish: Granted, according to my opinion, that I derive the halakha of sequestering from the inauguration, that explains that which is taught in the baraita: With regard to both this priest engaged in the burning of the red heifer and that High Priest prior to Yom Kippur, one sprinkles upon him for all seven days the purification water mixed with ashes from samples from all the previous red heifer sin-offerings that were safeguarded there in the Temple. The reason for this practice is that there was also sprinkling during the inauguration. However, according to your opinion, that you derive it from Sinai, was there in fact sprinkling at Sinai? According to your opinion, why are the priests sprinkled?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讜诇讟注诪讬讱 诪讬 谞讬讞讗 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讚诐 讛讻讗 诪讬诐 讛讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讚转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 谞讻谞住讜 诪讬诐 转讞转 讚诐 讗诇讗 诇讚讬讚讱 讛讝讗讛 讘住讬谞讬 诪讬 讛讜讗讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪注诇讛 讘注诇诪讗

Reish Lakish said to him: And according to your reasoning, does it work out well? At the inauguration, the sprinkling was with blood; here, the sprinkling was with water. Rabbi Yo岣nan answered: That is not difficult, as Rabbi 岣yya taught: Water replaced blood, but both have the status of sprinkling. However, according to your reasoning, at Sinai, was there sprinkling at all? Reish Lakish said to him: The Sages merely established a higher standard, and this sprinkling is not a requirement.

转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讝讗转 讬讘讗 讗讛专谉 讗诇 讛拽讚砖 讘诪讛 砖讗诪讜专 讘注谞讬谉 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讘注谞讬谉 讚诪诇讜讗讬诐 讜诪讛 讗诪讜专 讘注谞讬谉 讚诪诇讜讗讬诐 讗讛专谉 驻讬专砖 砖讘注讛 讜砖诪砖 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讜诪砖讛 诪住专 诇讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讻讚讬 诇讞谞讻讜 讘注讘讜讚讛

搂 The Gemara comments: A baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan that the sequestering is derived from the inauguration; and a baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Reish Lakish that it is derived from Sinai. The Gemara elaborates: A baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan: It was stated with regard to the inauguration: 鈥淲ith this Aaron will come into the Sanctuary, with a young bull for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering鈥 (Leviticus 16:3). To what is the term: With this, referring? It is referring to that which is stated in the matter. What is the matter? It is the matter of the inauguration. In the manner that the priest was prepared for the inauguration, so too is he prepared for Yom Kippur. And what is stated in the matter of the inauguration? It is that Aaron the priest withdrew for seven days and served one day, and Moses transmitted the Torah guidelines to him all seven days in order to train him in the Sanctuary service.

讜讗祝 诇讚讜专讜转 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 驻讜专砖 砖讘注讛 讜诪砖诪砖 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讜砖谞讬 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 诪转诇诪讬讚讬讜 砖诇 诪砖讛 诇讗驻讜拽讬 爪讚讜拽讬谉 诪讜住专讬谉 诇讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讻讚讬 诇讞谞讻讜 讘注讘讜讚讛

And throughout the generations as well, the High Priest withdraws seven days prior to Yom Kippur and serves one day. And two Torah scholars from among the students of Moses, to the exclusion of Sadducees, who are not students of Moses, transmit the Torah guidelines to him all seven days in order to train him in the Sanctuary service.

诪讻讗谉 讗诪专讜 砖讘注转 讬诪讬诐 拽讜讚诐 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 诪驻专讬砖讬谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪讘讬转讜 诇诇砖讻转 驻专讛讚专讬谉 讜讻砖诐 砖诪驻专讬砖讬谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讻讱 诪驻专讬砖讬谉 讻讛谉 讛砖讜专祝 讗转 讛驻专讛 诇诇砖讻讛 砖注诇 驻谞讬 讛讘讬专讛 爪驻讜谞讛 诪讝专讞讛 讜讗讞讚 讝讛 讜讗讞讚 讝讛 诪讝讬谉 注诇讬讜 讻诇 砖讘注讛 诪讻诇 讞讟讗讜转 砖讛讬讜 砖诐

From there the Sages said in the mishna: Seven days prior to Yom Kippur the Sages would remove the High Priest, who performs the entire Yom Kippur service, from his house to the Chamber of Parhedrin; and just as the Sages would remove the High Priest, so do they remove the priest who burns the heifer, from his house to the chamber that was before the bira at the northeast corner of the courtyard on the Temple Mount. And with regard to both this priest whom the Sages sequester prior to Yom Kippur and that priest whom the Sages sequester prior to engaging in the burning of the heifer, one sprinkles upon him, for all seven days of sequestering, the purification water with ashes from all the previous red heifer sin-offerings that were safeguarded there in the Temple.

讜讗诐 转讗诪专 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讚诐 讛讻讗 诪讬诐 讗诪专转 谞讻谞住讜 诪讬诐 转讞转 讚诐 讜讗讜诪专 讻讗砖专 注砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛讝讛 爪讜讛 讛壮 诇注砖讜转 诇讻驻专 注诇讬讻诐 诇注砖讜转 讗诇讜 诪注砖讛 驻专讛 诇讻驻专 讗诇讜 诪注砖讛 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐

And if you say that at the inauguration the sprinkling was with blood, and here the sprinkling was with water, you said: Water replaced blood. And it says in the verse: 鈥淎s has been done this day, so the Lord has commanded to do, to make atonement for you鈥 (Leviticus 8:34). To do, these are the actions performed in the burning of the red heifer; to make atonement, these are the actions performed on Yom Kippur. This baraita, then, is proof for the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan.

讜讛讗讬 讘讝讗转 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇讙讜驻讬讛 讘驻专 讘谉 讘拽专 诇讞讟讗转 讜讗讬诇 诇注讜诇讛 讗诪专讬 讗讬 诇拽专讘谉 诇讞讜讚讬讛 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 讘讝讛 讗讜 讘讗诇讛 诪讗讬 讘讝讗转 砖诪注转 诪讬谞讛 转专转讬

The Gemara analyzes the baraita. But the term: With this [bezot], is required for the meaning of the verse itself; the priest is required to bring a young bull for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering. The Sages say in response: If the term comes to teach only with regard to the offerings, let the verse say: With this [bezeh], in the masculine, referring to the bull, or: With these [be鈥檈lleh], referring to the bull and the ram. What, then, may be derived from the use of the feminine term bezot, which refers to neither the bull nor the ram? Learn from it two conclusions; one with regard to the offerings and one with regard to sequestering.

诪讗讬 讜讗讜诪专 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 拽诪讗 讛讜讗 讚讘注讬 驻专讬砖讛 讻讚讗砖讻讞谉 讘诪诇讜讗讬诐 讗讘诇 讘讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 讚注诇诪讗 诇讗 讗讬 谞诪讬 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 拽诪讗 讛讜讗 讚讘注讬 驻专讬砖讛 讗讘诇 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讘注诇诪讗 诇讗 转讗 砖诪注 讻讗砖专 注砖讛 讜讻讜壮

The Gemara continues its analysis of the baraita. What is the meaning of the term: And it says? Why does the baraita cite an additional proof from another verse? Why wasn鈥檛 the first proof sufficient? And if you say that it is on the first Yom Kippur when Aaron performed the service that the High Priest requires sequestering, as we find in the inauguration when the priests were sequestered before being consecrated as priests, but on Yom Kippur in general, no, subsequent High Priests do not require sequestering; or alternatively, if you say: It is the first High Priest who requires sequestering, as did all the priests during the inauguration, but subsequent High Priests in general, no, they do not require sequestering before Yom Kippur; then come and hear that which it says in the verse: 鈥淎s has been done this day, so the Lord has commanded to do,鈥 meaning that this is a mitzva for all generations.

转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诪砖讛 注诇讛 讘注谞谉 讜谞转讻住讛 讘注谞谉 讜谞转拽讚砖 讘注谞谉 讻讚讬 诇拽讘诇 转讜专讛 诇讬砖专讗诇 讘拽讚讜砖讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 注诇 讛专 住讬谞讬 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讗讞专 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 砖讛讬讜 转讞诇讛 诇讗专讘注讬诐 讬讜诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬

搂 And a baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Reish Lakish that sequestering is derived from Sinai: Moses ascended in the cloud, and was covered in the cloud, and was sanctified in the cloud, in order to receive the Torah for the Jewish people in sanctity, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai and the cloud covered him six days, and He called to Moses on the seventh day from the midst of the cloud鈥 (Exodus 24:16). This was an incident that occurred after the revelation of the Ten Commandments to the Jewish people, and these six days were the beginning of the forty days that Moses was on the mountain (see Exodus 24:18); this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. The opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili corresponds to that of Reish Lakish; Moses withdrew for six days before receiving permission to stand in the presence of God.

专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 诪专讗砖 讞讜讚砖

Rabbi Akiva says: This incident occurred before the revelation of the Ten Commandments to the Jewish people, and when the Torah says: 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai,鈥 it is referring to the revelation of the Divine Presence that began on the New Moon of Sivan, which was six days before the revelation of the Ten Commandments.

讜讬讻住讛讜 讛注谞谉 诇讛专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 [诪砖讛] 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 注讜诪讚讬谉 讜诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇讞诇拽 讻讘讜讚 诇诪砖讛 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇诪专拽 讗讻讬诇讛 讜砖转讬讛 砖讘诪注讬讜 诇砖讜诪讜 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转

And that which is written: 鈥淎nd the cloud covered him,鈥 means the cloud covered it, the mountain, and not him, Moses. 鈥淎nd He called toMoses鈥; Moses and all of the Jewish people were standing at the foot of the mountain and listening, and if God did not mean that Moses was to climb the mountain, why did He call him? The verse comes only to accord deference to Moses, as the entire nation heard God address him. Rabbi Natan says: Moses was in fact called to enter the cloud; however, his entrance was not for the purpose of sequestering and purifying him, rather, the verse comes only to cleanse the food and drink that was in his intestines, to render him like the ministering angels who require neither food nor drink.

专讘讬 诪转讬讗 讘谉 讞专砖 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇讗讬讬诐 注诇讬讜 讻讚讬 砖转讛讗 转讜专讛 谞讬转谞转 讘讗讬诪讛 讘专转转 讜讘讝讬注 砖谞讗诪专 注讘讚讜 讗转 讛壮 讘讬专讗讛 讜讙讬诇讜 讘专注讚讛 诪讗讬 讜讙讬诇讜 讘专注讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 诪转谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讘诪拽讜诐 讙讬诇讛 砖诐 转讛讗 专注讚讛

Rabbi Matya ben 岣rash says: The verse calling Moses into the cloud comes only to intimidate Moses, to instill in him a sense of awe of the Creator, so that the Torah would be delivered with reverence, with quaking and with trembling, as it is stated: 鈥淪erve the Lord with awe, and rejoice with trembling鈥 (Psalms 2:11). Apropos the end of the verse, the Gemara asks: What is the meaning of 鈥渁nd rejoice with trembling鈥? Joy and trembling seem contradictory. Rav Adda bar Mattana said that Rav said: Where there is the joy of fulfilling a mitzva, there will be the trembling of the awe of Heaven there.

讘诪讗讬 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讜专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讘驻诇讜讙转讗 讚讛谞讬 转谞讗讬 讚转谞讬讗 讘砖砖讛 讘讞讜讚砖 谞讬转谞讛 转讜专讛 诇讬砖专讗诇 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘砖讘注讛 讘讜 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖砖讛 讘砖砖讛 谞讬转谞讛 讜讘砖讘注讛 注诇讛 (讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬) 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖讘注讛 讘砖讘注讛 谞讬转谞讛 讜讘砖讘注讛 注诇讛 [讚讻转讬讘 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬]

搂 Apropos the interpretation of the verse with regard to revelation, the Gemara asks: With regard to what do Rabbi Yosei HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva disagree? The Gemara explains that their dispute is parallel to the dispute between these other tanna鈥檌m, as it was taught in a baraita: On the sixth day of the month of Sivan, the Torah, the Ten Commandments, was given to the Jewish people. Rabbi Yosei says: It was on the seventh day of the month. According to the one who said that it was on the sixth, the Torah was given on the sixth, which is the day of the revelation of the Ten Commandments, and on the seventh day of the month Moses ascended the mountain, as it is written: 鈥淎nd He called to Moses on the seventh day鈥 (Exodus 24:16). According to the one who said that the Torah was given on the seventh of the month, it was given on the seventh and Moses ascended on the seventh, as it is written: 鈥淎nd he called to Moses on the seventh day.鈥

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 住讘专 诇讛 讻转谞讗 拽诪讗 讚讗诪专 讘砖砖讛 讘讞讜讚砖 谞讬转谞讛 转讜专讛 讛诇讻讱 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讗讞专 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 注诇 讛专 住讬谞讬 讜讬讻住讛讜 讛注谞谉 砖砖转 讬诪讬诐 诇诪砖讛 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 砖讗专 转讜专讛 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讜讬砖讻讜谉 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 诪专讗砖 讞讜讚砖 讜讬讻住讛讜 讛注谞谉 诇讛专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讘讬讜诐 讛砖讘讬注讬 诇拽讘讜诇讬 注砖专转 讛讚讘专讜转 讛讗 拽讘讬诇讜 诇讛讜 诪砖砖讛 讜讛讗 讗住转诇拽 注谞谉 诪砖砖讛

The Gemara proceeds to link the two disputes. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili holds in accordance with the opinion of the first tanna in the baraita, who said that it was on the sixth of the month that the Torah was given; therefore, this incident occurred after the revelation of the Ten Commandments. That is why he explains the verse 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode on Mount Sinai and the cloud covered him for six days鈥 to mean that the cloud covered Moses, and He called to Moses on the seventh day to receive the rest of the Torah. As, should it enter your mind to interpret the verse as follows: 鈥淎nd the glory of the Lord abode鈥 from the New Moon of Sivan; 鈥淎nd the cloud covered it,鈥 the mountain; 鈥淎nd He called to Moses on the seventh day,鈥 to receive only the Ten Commandments; didn鈥檛 they already receive the Ten Commandments on the sixth of the month, and the cloud that was on the mountain already departed on the sixth of the month?

讜专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 住讘专 诇讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讚讗诪专 讘砖讘注讛 讘讞讚砖 谞讬转谞讛 转讜专讛 诇讬砖专讗诇 讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讚诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讘砖讘注讛 注砖专 讘转诪讜讝 谞砖转讘专讜 讛诇讜讞讜转 注砖专讬谉 讜讗专讘注讛 讚住讬讜谉 讜砖讬转住专 讚转诪讜讝 诪诇讜 诇讛讜 讗专讘注讬谉 讬讜诪讬谉 讚讛讜讛 讘讛专 讜讘砖讘住专 讘转诪讜讝 谞讞讬转 讜讗转讗 讜转讘专讬谞讛讜 诇诇讜讞讜转

And Rabbi Akiva holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who said that on the seventh of the month the Torah was given to the Jewish people. That is why Moses was summoned on the seventh of the month immediately after the revelation of the Ten Commandments. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva that the Torah was given on the seventh of Sivan and Moses then proceeded to climb the mountain and remain there for forty days, that explains the calculation that you find: On the seventeenth of Tammuz the tablets were shattered, according to the standard tradition. How so? Calculate twenty-four days until the end of Sivan and sixteen days of Tammuz; they total the forty days that he was on the mountain. On the seventeenth of Tammuz he descended from the mountain and came and shattered the tablets.

讗诇讗 诇专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讚讗诪专 砖砖讛 讚驻专讬砖讛 讜讗专讘注讬谉 讚讛专 注讚 注砖专讬谉 讜转诇转 讘转诪讜讝 诇讗 讗转讘讜专 诇讜讞讜转 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讗专讘注讬谉 讚讛专 讘讛讚讬 砖砖讛 讚驻专讬砖讛

However, according to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, who said: There were six days of sequestering after the Torah was given and an additional forty days that Moses was on the mountain, the tablets were not shattered until the twenty-third of Tammuz, contrary to the standard tradition. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili could have said to you: The forty days that Moses was on the mountain include the six days of sequestering.

讗诪专 诪专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 诪砖讛 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 注讜诪讚讬谉 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 诪砖讛 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 注讜诪讚讬谉 讜诇讗 讘讗 讛讻转讜讘 讗诇讗 诇讞诇拽 诇讜 讻讘讜讚 诇诪砖讛

The Master said in that baraita cited above that when the Torah says: 鈥淎nd He called to Moses,鈥 it means that Moses and all of the Jewish people were standing and listening. The Gemara suggests that this supports the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar said that when the Torah says: 鈥淎nd He called to Moses,鈥 it means that Moses and all of the Jewish people were standing and listening and the verse comes only to accord deference to Moses. From Rabbi Elazar鈥檚 statement it is clear that all of Israel heard the voice of God.

诪讬转讬讘讬 拽讜诇 诇讜 拽讜诇 讗诇讬讜 诪砖讛 砖诪注 讜讻诇 讬砖专讗诇 诇讗 砖诪注讜 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘住讬谞讬 讛讗 讘讗讛诇 诪讜注讚 讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讘拽专讬讗讛 讛讗 讘讚讘讜专

The Gemara raises an objection: The Torah states: 鈥淎nd when Moses went into the Tent of Meeting that He might speak with him, then he heard the voice speaking unto him from above the Ark cover that was upon the Ark of the Testimony, from between the two cherubs; and He spoke unto him鈥 (Numbers 7:89). The Torah could have said: He heard the voice speaking to him; however, instead the verse said: He heard the voice speaking unto him, indicating that the voice reached him alone. Moses alone heard God鈥檚 voice and all of the Jewish people did not hear it. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This case, where everyone heard God鈥檚 voice, was at Sinai. That case, where Moses alone heard God鈥檚 voice, was at the Tent of Meeting. Or if you wish, say instead an alternative resolution. This is not difficult; when God addressed Moses by calling to him, everyone heard; that which God subsequently communicated by speaking, Moses alone heard.

专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 专诪讬 拽专讗讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 专诪讬 讻转讬讘 讜诇讗 讬讻讜诇 诪砖讛 诇讘讗 讗诇 讗讛诇 诪讜注讚 讻讬 砖讻谉 注诇讬讜 讛注谞谉 讜讻转讬讘 讜讬讘讗 诪砖讛 讘转讜讱 讛注谞谉 诪诇诪讚 砖转驻住讜 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诇诪砖讛 讜讛讘讬讗讜 讘注谞谉

Rabbi Zerika raised a contradiction between verses before Rabbi Elazar, and some say that Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Elazar raised a contradiction: It is written in one place: 鈥淎nd Moses was not able to enter into the Tent of Meeting because the cloud dwelt on it鈥 (Exodus 40:35), as Moses was unable to enter the cloud. And it is written elsewhere: 鈥淎nd Moses came into the cloud鈥 (Exodus 24:18). This teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, grabbed Moses and brought him into the cloud since he could not enter on his own.

讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 转谞讗 谞讗诪专 讻讗谉 讘转讜讱 讜谞讗诪专 诇讛诇谉 讘转讜讱 讜讬讘讜讗讜 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讘转讜讱 讛讬诐 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 砖讘讬诇 讚讻转讬讘 讜讛诪讬诐 诇讛诐 讞讜诪讛 讗祝 讻讗谉 砖讘讬诇

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: There is a verbal analogy that resolves this contradiction. It is stated here: 鈥淎nd Moses came into the cloud,鈥 and it is stated below, in another verse: 鈥淎nd the children of Israel went into the sea on dry land鈥 (Exodus 14:22); Just as below, there was a path within the sea, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the water was a wall for them鈥 (Exodus 14:22), here too, there was a path through the cloud, but Moses did not actually enter the cloud.

讜讬拽专讗 讗诇 诪砖讛 讜讬讚讘专 诇诪讛 讛拽讚讬诐 拽专讬讗讛 诇讚讬讘讜专 诇讬诪讚讛 转讜专讛 讚专讱 讗专抓 砖诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗讚诐 讚讘专 诇讞讘讬专讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 拽讜专讛讜 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 诇讗 讬讗诪专 讗讚诐 讚讘专 诇讞讘讬专讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 拽讜专讛讜 诇讗诪专 讗诪专 专讘讬 (诪讜住讬讗 讘专 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 诪住讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 诪讜住讬讗) 专讘讛 诪谞讬讬谉 诇讗讜诪专 讚讘专 诇讞讘讬专讜 砖讛讜讗 讘讘诇 讬讗诪专 注讚 砖讬讗诪专 诇讜 诇讱 讗诪讜专 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讚讘专 讛壮 讗诇讬讜 诪讗讛诇 诪讜注讚 诇讗诪专

The verse says: 鈥淎nd He called unto Moses, and the Lord spoke unto him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying鈥 (Leviticus 1:1). Why does the verse mention calling before speaking, and God did not speak to him at the outset? The Torah is teaching etiquette: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. This supports the opinion of Rabbi 岣nina, as Rabbi 岣nina said: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. With regard to the term concluding the verse: 鈥淪aying,鈥 Rabbi Musya, grandson of Rabbi Masya, said in the name of Rabbi Musya the Great: From where is it derived with regard to one who tells another some matter, that it is incumbent upon the latter not to say it to others until the former explicitly says to him: Go and tell others? As it is stated: 鈥淎nd the Lord spoke to him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying [lemor].鈥 Lemor is a contraction of lo emor, meaning: Do not say. One must be given permission before transmitting information.

诪讻诇诇 讚转专讜讜讬讬讛讜 住讘讬专讗 诇讛讜 诪诇讜讗讬诐 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 讚讗讬转诪专 诪诇讜讗讬诐 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讞讚 讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讚讘专 讛诪注讻讘 诇讚讜专讜转 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 砖讗讬谉 诪注讻讘 诇讚讜专讜转 讗讬谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉

搂 After digressing to interpret the verses with regard to Mount Sinai, the Gemara resumes its discussion of the statements of Rabbi Yo岣nan and Reish Lakish. Based on the question Reish Lakish addressed to Rabbi Yo岣nan and the fact that Rabbi Yo岣nan accepted the premise of that question, we learn by inference that both maintain that with regard to the inauguration, failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration. As it is stated: Rabbi Yo岣nan and Rabbi 岣nina disagree. One said: Failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration. And one said: A matter that invalidates offerings throughout the generations invalidates the inauguration; a matter that does not invalidate offerings throughout the generations does not invalidate the inauguration.

转住转讬讬诐 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 诪讚拽讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 诇拽讬砖 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗讬 诪讛 诪诇讜讗讬诐 讻诇 讛讻转讜讘 讘讛谉 诪注讻讘 讘讛谉 讜诇讗 拽讗 诪讛讚专 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诪讬讚讬 转住转讬讬诐

Conclude that Rabbi Yo岣nan is the one who said: Failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration. This may be concluded from the fact that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says to Rabbi Yo岣nan: Just as with regard to the inauguration, failure to perform all the details that are written in its regard invalidates the inauguration, so too is the halakha with regard to Yom Kippur, and Rabbi Yo岣nan did not respond and did not say anything, indicating that he agreed. The Gemara states: Conclude that this indeed is the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan.

诪讗讬 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜

The Gemara asks: What is the practical halakhic difference between the opinions of Rabbi Yo岣nan and Rabbi 岣nina?

Scroll To Top