Yoma 47

הוציאו לו את הכף ואת המחתה חפן מלא חפניו ונתן לתוך הכף הגדול לפי גדלו והקטן לפי קטנו וכך היתה מדתה נטל את המחתה בימינו ואת הכף בשמאלו

MISHNA: They brought out the spoon and the coal pan to the High Priest so he may perform the service of the incense. He scoops his handfuls from the incense and places it into the spoon. The High Priest with large hands fills the spoon with incense in an amount corresponding to the large size of his hands, and the High Priest with small hands fills the spoon with incense in an amount corresponding to the small size of his hands. And this was the measure of the spoon, i.e., it was made to correspond to the size of his hands. He took the coal pan in his right hand and the spoon in his left hand.

גמ׳ מחתה תנא ליה נטל את המחתה ועלה לראש המזבח וחותה ויורד התם מחתה דגחלים והכא מחתה דקטורת דתניא הוציאו לו כף ריקן מלשכת הכלים ומחתה גדושה של קטורת מלשכת בית אבטינס

GEMARA: The Gemara expresses surprise at the statement of the mishna. In an earlier mishna, the tanna already taught that the High Priest must bring the coal pan: He takes a coal pan and ascends to the top of the altar and rakes and descends. Why does the tanna mention the taking of the coal pan again? The Gemara explains: There the mishna deals with the coal pan of burning coals, and here the mishna is referring to the coal pan of incense, which he would later scoop out. As it was explicitly taught in a baraita: They brought out an empty spoon for him from the chamber of vessels, and a coal pan heaped with incense from the Chamber of the House of Avtinas.

חפן מלא חפניו ונותן לתוך הכף הגדול לפי גדלו והקטן לפי קטנו וכך היתה מדתה כף ביום הכפורים למה לי מלא חפניו והביא אמר רחמנא

§ The mishna taught: He scoops his handfuls from the incense and places it into the spoon. The High Priest with large hands fills the spoon with incense corresponding to the large size of his hands, and the High Priest with small hands fills the spoon corresponding to the small size of his hands, and this was the measure of the spoon, according to the size of his hands. The Gemara asks: Why do I need a spoon on Yom Kippur? After all, the Merciful One states: “And he shall take a coal pan full of coals of fire from off the altar from before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small and bring it within the veil” (Leviticus 16:12). This verse suggests that the handfuls are brought by hand rather than in a vessel.

משום דלא אפשר דהיכי נעביד נעייל והדר נעייל הבאה אחת אמר רחמנא ולא שתי הבאות

The Gemara answers: The High Priest uses a spoon because it is impossible to perform the service otherwise. The Gemara elaborates: As what should we do? Let him bring in the coal pan and then bring in the incense? The Merciful One states one act of bringing for the coals and the incense, and not two acts of bringing.

נשקליה לקטורת בחופניו ונחתיה [למחתה] עלה וליעול כי מטי התם היכי לעביד נשקליה בשיניה ונחתיה למחתה השתא לפני מלך בשר ודם אין עושין כן לפני מלך מלכי המלכים הקדוש ברוך הוא על אחת כמה וכמה

Instead, let him take the incense by his handfuls and place the coal pan on top of his two handfuls and enter, carrying it all in one go. This suggestion is also impractical, as when he arrives there, in the Holy of Holies, what should he do? How can the High Priest put down the coal pan where it is? Let him take the coal pan in his teeth and lower it. Now, before a king of flesh and blood one would not do so, as it is disrespectful. All the more so, one would not act in this manner before the King of kings, the Holy One, Blessed be He.

הלכך לא אפשר וכיון דלא אפשר עבדינן כדאשכחן בנשיאים

The Gemara concludes: Therefore, it is impossible for the High Priest to behave in another way, and since it is impossible to act in any other manner, he acts as we find with regard to the sacrifices of the princes during the dedication of the Tabernacle. On that occasion, the princes brought spoons filled with incense: “One golden spoon of ten shekels full of incense” (Numbers 7:14).

נטל את המחתה בימין ואת הכף בשמאל יציבא בארעא וגיורא בשמי שמיא

§ The mishna taught that the High Priest took the coal pan in his right hand and the spoon in his left hand. The Gemara questions this arrangement by citing a well-known maxim: The native is on the ground and the stranger is in the heavens; i.e., this is the opposite of what one would expect. The main component of the mitzva is the incense, while the coal pan is required only for burning the incense. Consequently, the High priest should carry the spoon, which contains the main component of the service, in his right hand, and the accessory in his left hand.

זו מרובה וזו מועטת ואפילו בזמן ששניהן שוין וכמעשה דרבי ישמעאל בן קמחית זו חמה וזו צוננת

The Gemara explains: The service is performed in this manner for reasons of comfort, as this coal pan is greater in weight, since it holds the coals, and that spoon of incense weighs less. And even when the two of them are equal, when the spoon contains three kav of incense like the action of Rabbi Yishmael ben Kimḥit, who could hold several kav in his exceptionally large hands, nevertheless, this coal pan is hot and must be held carefully in the right hand, and that spoon of incense is cold and is easily carried in the left.

אמרו עליו על רבי ישמעאל בן קמחית שהיה חופן ארבעת קבין במלוא חפניו ואומר כל הנשים זרדו וזרד אימא עלה לגג איכא דאמרי בערסן וכדרבה בר יונתן דאמר רבה בר יונתן אמר רבי יחיאל ערסן יפה לחולה

§ Since the Gemara has mentioned Rabbi Yishmael ben Kimḥit, it discusses him further. They said about Rabbi Yishmael ben Kimḥit that his hands were so large that he would scoop up four kav, which he would hold by his handfuls, and say: All the women selected the best they could for their children, but the selection of my mother rose to the roof, i.e., my mother chose the best. Rabbi Yishmael ben Kimḥit is referring to himself, as he matured to a great height and stature. Some say he was referring to his mother’s selection of flour, in accordance with the statement of Rabba bar Yonatan. As Rabba bar Yonatan said that Rabbi Yeḥiel said: Flour is beneficial and healthy for the sick. Since his mother ate this flour when she was pregnant with him, her son grew heartily.

ואיכא דאמרי בשכבת זרע וכדרבי אבהו דרבי אבהו רמי כתיב ותזרני [חיל] למלחמה וכתיב המאזרני חיל אמר דוד לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא רבונו של עולם זריתני וזרזתני

And some say this reference to selection is a euphemism for semen, in accordance with a statement of Rabbi Abbahu, as Rabbi Abbahu raised a contradiction between two verses. It is written: “For You have girded me [vatazreni] with strength for battle” (II Samuel 22:40), and it is written in a parallel verse: “Who girds me [hame’azreni] with strength” (Psalms 18:33). What is the difference between these two expressions? David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe: You selected me [zeritani] with the best drop of semen that my mother absorbed, with which, You fashioned me [zeraztani] within her. This accounts for the variant forms of this expression.

אמרו עליו על רבי ישמעאל בן קמחית פעם אחת סיפר דברים עם ערבי אחד בשוק ונתזה צינורא מפיו על בגדיו ונכנס ישבב אחיו ושמש תחתיו וראתה אמן שני כהנים גדולים ביום אחד

The Gemara continues to discuss Rabbi Yishmael ben Kimḥit. They said about Rabbi Yishmael ben Kimḥit: Once he was talking to a certain Arab in the market on Yom Kippur, and a drop of saliva sprayed from the Arab’s mouth onto the clothes of Rabbi Yishmael, who was the High Priest at the time. This spittle rendered him ritually impure by rabbinic law, like the ritual impurity of a zav, preventing him from serving in the Temple. And his brother Yeshevav entered and served as High Priest on that day in his stead. And, consequently, their mother saw two of her sons serving as High Priests on a single day.

ושוב אמרו עליו על רבי ישמעאל בן קמחית פעם אחת יצא וסיפר עם הגמון אחד בשוק ונתזה צינורא מפיו על בגדיו ונכנס יוסף (עם) אחיו ושמש תחתיו וראתה אמן שני כהנים גדולים ביום אחד

And they further said about Rabbi Yishmael ben Kimḥit: Once he went out and talked to a certain officer [hegmon] in the market, and a drop of saliva sprayed from the officer’s mouth onto the clothes of Rabbi Yishmael, and his brother Yosef entered and served as High Priest in his stead. And, again, their mother saw two of her sons serving as High Priests on a single day.

תנו רבנן שבעה בנים היו לה לקמחית וכולן שמשו בכהונה גדולה אמרו לה חכמים מה עשית שזכית לכך אמרה להם מימי לא ראו קורות ביתי קלעי שערי אמרו לה הרבה עשו כן ולא הועילו

The Sages taught in a baraita: Kimḥit had seven sons, and they all served in the office of the High Priesthood, as High Priests or as his substitute. The Sages said to her: What good deeds did you perform to merit this? She said to them: In all my days, the beams of my house never saw the braids of my hair, as she was extremely modest and was strict about covering her hair even inside her own house. They said to her: Many women did so and did not succeed to such a degree; you must have been granted a special gift from God.

תנו רבנן בקומצו שלא יעשה מדה לקומץ איבעיא להו מהו שיעשה מדה לחפינה

§ The Sages taught: “And he shall take up from it his handful, of the fine flour of the meal-offering, and of its oil” (Leviticus 6:8). This verse teaches that he should not measure an amount for the handful of a meal-offering with a utensil, but he should separate it directly by hand. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the halakha as to whether the High Priest may measure an amount for the handful of incense? Must the incense also be scooped by hand?

התם הוא דכתיב בקומצו אבל הכא דלא כתיב בחפניו אלא מלא חפניו קטורת סמים דקה לא או דילמא יליף מלא מלא מקומצו

The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma: Perhaps there, in the case of the handful of a meal-offering, it is different, as it is written “in his handful,” which indicates that he must use his hand rather than a vessel. However here, where it is not written: In his hands, but “and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small” (Leviticus 16:12), perhaps this teaches that the handfuls of incense need not be taken directly by hand, and the High Priest may use a vessel to scoop out the required amount. Or perhaps this halakha is derived by means of a verbal analogy between “full” and “full,” from “his handful,” which is stated regarding the meal-offering. If this verbal analogy is accepted, the High Priest may likewise scoop the incense only by hand.

תא שמע וכך היתה מדתה מאי לאו שאם רצה לעשות מדה אחרת עושה לא הכי קאמר וכך היה חוזר וחופנה לפנים

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear an answer from the mishna: And this was the measure of the spoon. What, is it not correct to infer from the mishna that although the required measure is a handful, the High Priest is not obligated to scoop with his hand, and if he wanted to measure a different amount, he may measure the incense with a vessel? The Gemara rejects this contention: No, this is what the mishna said; this is what it means: And so too, the High Priest would return and scoop the incense inside the Holy of Holies in precisely the same manner.

שמעת מינה חופן וחוזר וחופן

The Gemara asks: If so, I can learn from this that the High Priest scoops the incense, and again scoops. That is, after scooping once, the High Priest repeats the action and scoops again in the Holy of Holies. This issue is subject to a dispute in the Gemara below.

דילמא שאם רצה לעשות מדה עושה אי נמי שלא יחסר ושלא יותיר

The Gemara rejects this claim: No; perhaps the mishna indeed means that if he wanted to measure a different amount, he may measure the incense with a vessel. The language of the mishna does not conclusively prove which interpretation is correct, and it is possible that the Gemara’s previous inference from the mishna is accurate. Consequently, the issue of whether or not the High Priest scoops incense a second time in the Holy of Holies cannot be considered resolved. Alternatively, the mishna may mean that the High Priest must take neither less nor more, and therefore this statement has no bearing on the dispute with regard to his scooping.

תנו רבנן מלא קומצו יכול מבורץ תלמוד לומר בקומצו אי בקומצו יכול אפילו בראשי אצבעותיו תלמוד לומר מלא קומצו כדקמצי אינשי הא כיצד חופה שלש אצבעותיו על פיסת ידו וקומץ

§ The Sages taught: “His handfuls” (Leviticus 2:2). I might have thought it should be overflowing from the handful, and therefore the verse states: “His handful” (Leviticus 6:8), which indicates a precise amount. If the halakha is based solely on the phrase “his handful,” I might have thought the priest may pinch a small amount even with just his fingertips, not with his entire finger. Therefore, the verse states: “His handfuls” (Leviticus 2:2), meaning as people usually take a handful, i.e., with their whole hand. How should he perform this service? He scoops by closing his three fingers over the palm of his hand, and takes a handful from the flour of the meal-offering.

ובמחבת ובמרחשת מוחק בגודלו מלמעלה ובאצבעו קטנה מלמטה וזו היא עבודה קשה שבמקדש זו היא ותו לא והא איכא מליקה והא איכא חפינה אלא זו היא מעבודות קשות שבמקדש

And in a case of a meal-offering prepared in a pan and with regard to a meal-offering prepared in a deep container, when the flour was fried before being scooped and was therefore hard, the priest smooths with his thumb any flour that was overflowing above his handful, and with his little finger he smooths the flour that was pushing out below. And this precise taking of a handful of a meal-offering is the most difficult sacrificial rite in the Temple. The Gemara asks: This one is the hardest rite, and no other? But there is pinching, which is also considered extremely difficult, and there is taking the handful of incense, another complex rite. Rather, this taking of a handful of a meal-offering is one of the most difficult rites in the Temple.

אמר רבי יוחנן בעי רבי יהושע בן עוזאה בין הבינים של מלא קומצו מהו אמר רב פפא דגואי לא תיבעי לך דודאי קומץ הוא דבראי לא תיבעי לך דודאי שירים הוא

§ Rabbi Yoḥanan said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Uza’a raised a dilemma: What is the halakha with regard to the flour that remains between the fingers of his handfuls? Is this flour considered to be part of his handful, or is it considered part of the remainder of the meal-offering? The Gemara elaborates: Rav Pappa said that with regard to the flour that is on the inside, toward the hand, do not raise the dilemma, as it is certainly part of the handful. Likewise, with regard to the flour that is on the outside, do not raise the dilemma, as it is certainly part of the remainder of the flour, like the rest of the meal-offering.

כי תיבעי לך דביני ביני מאי אמר רבי יוחנן הדר פשטה יהושע [בן] עוזאה בין הבינים ספק נינהו

Rather, let the dilemma be raised with regard to the flour between the inside and the outside. What is the status of this flour? Rav Yoḥanan said: Yehoshua ben Uza’a then resolved his own dilemma: The flour that is between is doubtful, and should be treated as questionable in status.

היכי עביד אמר רבי חנינא מקטיר קומץ לחודיה תחלה והדר בין הבינים דאי אמרת בין הבינים ברישא דילמא שירים נינהו והוו להו שירים שחסרו בין קמיצה [להקטרה] ואמר מר שירים שחסרו בין קמיצה להקטרה אין מקטירין עליהן את הקומץ

The Gemara asks: How does one perform the Temple service in this doubtful case? Rabbi Ḥanina said: The priest first burns the handful by itself, and then he burns the flour that was between. For if you say that he should first burn the flour that was between, perhaps they are remainders, and they are therefore considered like remainders that became reduced between taking the handful and burning, as the priest has taken flour from the remainders of the meal-offering. And the Master said: With regard to remainders that became reduced between taking the handful and the burning, one may not burn the handful on their account.

אי הכי השתא נמי איקרי כאן כל שממנו לאשים הרי הוא בבל תקטירו

The Gemara asks: If so, that there is uncertainty as to whether or not this flour is considered part of the remainder of the meal-offering, now too, if the priest burns the in-between flour after burning the handful, one should apply here the principle: Whatever is partly burned in the fire of the altar is subject to the prohibition do not burn. This principle states that if part of an item is burned on the altar, one who burns any other part of it, which is not designated for burning, has violated a prohibition. In this case, if the in-between flour is considered part of the remainder of the meal-offering, the priest who burns it transgresses that prohibition.

אמר רבי יהודה בריה דרבי שמעון בן פזי דמקטיר ליה לשום עצים כרבי אליעזר דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר לריח ניחוח אי אתה מעלה אבל אתה מעלה לשום עצים

Rav Yehuda, son of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, said that the priest does not burn the flour as part of the meal-offering but burns it for the purpose of wood. In other words, he does not burn the flour as part of an offering but merely as fuel for the altar, which is permitted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. As it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: “But they shall not come up for a sweet savor on the altar” (Leviticus 2:12). This verse indicates that you may not bring up leaven and honey as a “sweet savor,” an offering. However, you may bring up leaven and honey and other materials for the purpose of wood.

הניחא לרבי אליעזר אלא לרבנן מאי איכא למימר אמר רב מרי דקמצי שמיני השתא דאתית להכי רבי אליעזר נמי לכתחילה דקמצי שמיני

The Gemara asks: It works out well according to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, but according to the opinion of the Rabbis, who reject Rabbi Eliezer’s halakha, what can be said? Rav Mari said: The solution is that fat priests take the handfuls of meal-offerings, as their fleshy fingers press against everything between them, and therefore no flour remains between the fingers. The Gemara states: Now that you have arrived at this conclusion, according to Rabbi Eliezer as well, it is appropriate that fat priests should take the handfuls ab initio, to avoid a situation of doubt.

(בין הביניים פשט ומחץ ופזר וחשב בחפינת חבירו סימן) בעי רב פפא בין הבינים של מלא חפניו מהו מאי קא מבעיא ליה אי גמר מלא מלא מהתם היינו הך

§ Bein habeinayim, pashat, umaḥatz, ufizer, veḥishev, baḥafinat, ḥaveiro: This is a mnemonic for the ensuing questions of Rav Pappa. Rav Pappa raised a dilemma: What is the halakha with regard to the in-between incense of his handfuls? The Gemara asks: What is his dilemma? If he derives the verbal analogy between “full” and “full” from his handfuls there, the case of the meal-offering handful, this case is the same as that one, and therefore the incense between his fingers is invalid. If Rav Pappa does not accept this verbal analogy, what is the basis of his dilemma?

רב פפא הכי בעי ליה מלא חפניו והביא בעינן והא איכא או דילמא ולקח והביא בעינן והא ליכא תיקו

The Gemara explains that Rav Pappa raised the dilemma as follows: When the verse states: “And his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the veil” (Leviticus 16:12), does it mean that we merely require him to bring his handfuls, and that is fulfilled here, as in practice the High Priest brought full handfuls? Or perhaps we require that he must fulfill the following two commands in a similar manner: “And he shall take…and he shall bring” (Leviticus 16:12)? In other words, just as he must have the intention to take the incense, so too, he must intend to bring all of it. And that requirement is not fulfilled here, as he did not intend to bring the extra incense between his fingers. No answer was found for this question, and the Gemara concludes: Let it stand unresolved.

אמר רב פפא פשיטא לי מלא קומצו כדקמצי אינשי בעי רב פפא קמץ בראשי אצבעותיו מהו

Rav Pappa said: It is obvious to me that the act of his handfuls of a meal-offering should be performed ab initio in the manner that people usually take a handful, with their fingertips pointed downward. However, Rav Pappa raised a dilemma: What is the halakha if he took a handful with his fingertips, i.e., if he first put his palm into the vessel and filled his palm with flour by extending his fingers and drawing them in? Does this invalidate the taking of the handful or not?

מלמטה למעלה מהו מן הצדדין מהו תיקו

Furthermore, what is the halakha if he took the handful with the back of his hand placed downward in the vessel, and with his fingers collected the flour upward into his palm? Lastly, what is the halakha if he took the flour from the sides, by passing the back of his hand to and fro over the flour in the vessel with his fingers spread apart, so that the flour collects in his palm? As no answers were found for these dilemmas, the Gemara states: Let it stand unresolved.

אמר רב פפא פשיטא לי מלא חפניו כדחפני אינשי בעי רב פפא חפן בראשי אצבעותיו מהו מלמטה למעלה מהו מן הצד מהו חפן בזו ובזו וקרבן זו אצל זו מהו תיקו

Likewise, Rav Pappa said: It is obvious to me that when the Torah states: “His hands full” (Leviticus 16:12), it means in the manner that people usually fill their hands, by placing the backs of their hands into the vessel and bringing their hands together. However, Rav Pappa raised a dilemma: What is the halakha if the High Priest scooped a handful with his fingertips? Again, what is the halakha if he took a handful from downward to upward? What is the halakha if he took a handful from the side? And what is the halakha if he scooped a handful with this hand and with this hand and brought them together? These questions are not answered either, and the Gemara states: Let it stand unresolved.

בעי

§ Another dilemma was raised by