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

Today's Daf Yomi

June 9, 2021 | 讻状讟 讘住讬讜谉 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 Josh Sussman in honor of both his wife, Romi鈥檚 50th birthday and son, Zeli. "He will, B鈥橢zrat HaShem, be making his first solo siyum on Masechet Yoma at his Bar Mitzvah in July".

And for a refuah shleima for Pesha Etel bat Sarah.

  • This month's shiurim are sponsored by Shoshana Shur for the refuah Shlema of Meira Bat Zelda Zahava.

Yoma 59

Today鈥檚 daf is sponsored by Rabia Mitchell in honor of Oliver Mitchell on their 25th wedding anniversary.聽 These past 25 years have been overflowing in joy and laughter, our 5 children, thousands of Shabbos guests, traveling with the family or simply sitting together and learning the Daf. It has all been a delight and I am so grateful for each and every day. Thank you for sharing your life with me.

What is the point on which Rabbi Yosi HaGlili and Rabbi Akiva disagree regarding the direction in which the Kohen Gadol goes when doing the placements of blood on the inner altar? The gemara brings several options and analyzes them. After that the Kohen Gadol sprinkled the blood on the “tiharo” of the altar seven times – what part of the altar is that? The Kohen Gadol now leaves the Sanctuary and spills the remainder of blood into a hole at the base of the altar. Into which hole – the Western or Southern one? Is this the same or different from sacrifices whose blood was sprinkled on the outer altar? There are different opinions brought. Is there a law of misuse of consecrated property (meila) by the blood that goes from the base and drains out to Nachal Kidron? If there is, it is only rabbinic as there are no laws of meila by blood. Three drashot are brought to explain from where this is derived in the Torah.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讗讬 住讘讬专讗 诇谉 讛拽驻讛 讘专讙诇 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讬诇驻讬谞谉 驻谞讬诐 诪讞讜抓 讜讛讻讗 讘讛讗 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘专讙诇

And if you wish, say instead: If we hold that the encircling is performed by foot, i.e., the priest walks around the inner altar, everyone agrees that we learn the method of sprinkling inside from the sprinkling outside. And here they disagree about this matter: One Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that the priest stands in his place and sprinkles on all the corners from there, which means his encircling is performed by hand; and one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the encircling is done by foot.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜讛讻讗 讘讛讗 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 讬诇驻讬谞谉 讬讚 诪专讙诇 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗 讬诇驻讬谞谉

And if you wish, say instead: Everyone agrees that the encircling was performed by hand, and here they disagree about this matter: One Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that we derive the halakhot of an encircling performed by hand from those of an encircling by foot, and therefore the ritual of the inner altar is the same as that of the outer altar. And one Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that we do not derive the encircling performed by hand from the encircling done by foot.

讜住讘专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜讛讗 诪讚拽转谞讬 住讬驻讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 诪讻诇诇 讚转谞讗 拽诪讗 诇讗 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 诪讞讜讜专转讗 讻讚砖谞讬谞谉 诪注讬拽专讗 诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘专讙诇

搂 The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Yosei HaGelili hold that the encircling is performed by hand? But from the fact that it is taught in the latter clause of the mishna that Rabbi Eliezer says: He stood in one place and sprinkled the blood from there, it can be learned by inference that the first tanna, whom the Gemara identified as Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, does not maintain that the rite is performed in this manner. Rather, it is clear as we originally answered, that one Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that the encircling is performed by hand; and one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the encircling is performed by foot.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讛讗 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讻住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讜诪专 住讘专 讻讜诇讬讛 诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讘诪拽讜诐 讞讚讗 拽专谉 讚诪讝讘讞 讞讬爪讜谉 拽讗讬

And if you wish, say instead that they disagree about this matter: One Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that the perimeter of the inner altar is like the perimeter of the outer altar, and one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the entire inner altar stands in place of one corner of the outer altar. Since the entire inner altar is only one cubit by one cubit, like a single corner of the outer altar, the halakhot of the outer altar are not relevant to the inner altar.

转谞讬讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 砖谞讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐 谞砖转讬讬专讜 讘诪拽讚砖 专讗砖讜谉 讝讛 讗讜诪专 讘讬讚讬 讛拽驻转讬 讜讝讛 讗讜诪专 讘专讙诇讬 讛拽驻转讬 讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜 讜讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜

It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael said: Two High Priests remained from the days of the First Temple. This one says: I encircled by hand and sprinkled, and I did not encircle the perimeter of the inner altar by foot. And that one says: I encircled by foot. This one gave a reason for his statement, and that one gave a reason for his statement.

讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜 住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讻住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讜讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜 讻讜诇讬讛 诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讘诪拽讜诐 讞讚讗 拽专谉 讚讞讬爪讜谉 拽讗讬

The one who said that he encircled by foot gave the following reason for his statement: The perimeter of the inner altar is like the perimeter of the outer altar, which is encircled by foot for sprinkling. And the one who said that he encircled by hand gave the following reason for his statement: The entire inner altar stands in place of one corner of the outer altar. Just as for one corner of the outer altar, the priest sprinkles the blood by hand, the same applies to the entire inner altar.

专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪谞讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 讜注诇 讻讜诇谉 讛讬讛 谞讜转谉 诪诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 讞讜抓 诪讗讜转讛 砖讘讗诇讻住讜谉 砖谞讜转谉 诪诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛

搂 It was taught in the mishna that Rabbi Eliezer says: He stood in one place and sprinkled the blood from there. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is the mishna? The Gemara answers: The mishna is taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who explained Rabbi Eliezer鈥檚 ruling in the following manner. As it was taught in a baraita, later tanna鈥檌m disagreed with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Meir says that Rabbi Eliezer says as follows: He stood in one place and sprinkled, and on all of the corners he presented the blood from above downward, so as not to drip blood down the sleeve of his garment, except for that corner on the diagonal [alakhson] across from him. Since it was difficult for him to sprinkle on that corner from top to bottom, he sprinkled from below upward.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 讜注诇 讻讜诇谉 讛讜讗 谞讜转谉 诪诇诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛 讞讜抓 诪讝讜 砖讛讬转讛 诇驻谞讬讜 诪诪砖 砖谞讜转谉 诪诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 谞讬转讜讜住谉 诪讗谞讬讛

Conversely, Rabbi Yehuda says that Rabbi Eliezer says: He stood in one place and sprinkled, and on all of the corners he sprinkled from below upward, as it is more convenient to sprinkle in that manner, except for that one which was directly before him, on which he would present from above downward. The reason is so as not to dirty his garments with blood. If he sprinkled on the corner next to him from below upward, the blood might fall on his clothes, and he would have to change garments, as dirty priestly garments may not be worn for the Temple service.

讛讝讛 诪诪谞讜 注诇 讟讛专讜 砖诇 诪讝讘讞 诪讗讬 讟讛专讜 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 驻诇讙讬讛 讚诪讝讘讞 讻讚讗诪专讬 讗讬谞砖讬 讟讛专 讟讬讛专讗 讜讛讜讬 驻诇讙讬讛 讚讬讜诪讗

搂 The mishna taught: He sprinkled blood on the pure gold [tohoro] of the altar. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the term tohoro? Rabba bar Rav Sheila said: It means half of the altar, as people commonly say: Tehar tihara, the light of noon shines and it is the middle of the day. Here, too, tohoro of the altar means half the altar, i.e., he sprinkled on the midpoint of the altar wall.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讻砖讛讜讗 诪讝讛 讗讬谞讜 诪讝讛 诇讗 注诇 讙讘讬 讛讗驻专 讜诇讗 注诇 讙讘讬 讛讙讞诇讬诐 讗诇讗 讞讜转讛 讙讞诇讬诐 讗讬诇讱 讜讗讬诇讱 讜诪讝讛 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 注诇 讙诇讜讬讛 讚诪讝讘讞 讻讚讻转讬讘 讜讻注爪诐 讛砖诪讬诐 诇讟讜讛专

The Gemara raises an objection: When he sprinkles on the inner altar, he sprinkles neither on top of the ash nor on top of the coals; rather, he rakes and removes the coals to both sides and sprinkles. This indicates that this sprinkling was performed on top of the altar, not on its side. Rather, Rabba bar Rav Sheila retracted his previous interpretation and said: On tohoro of the altar means on the exposed area of the altar, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the like of the very heaven for clearness [letohar]鈥 (Exodus 24:10), which shows that tohar is an expression of clarity.

转谞讬讗 讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 讘爪讚 爪驻讜谞讬 讛讜讗 谞讜转谉 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘爪讚 讚专讜诪讬 讛讜讗 谞讜转谉 讘诪讗讬 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 驻讬转讞讗 讘讚专讜诐 拽讗讬 讜诪专 住讘专 驻讬转讞讗 讘爪驻讜谉 拽讗讬

It was taught in a baraita that 岣nanya says: The priest presents seven sprinklings on the north side of the altar, and Rabbi Yosei says: He presents them on the south side. The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do they disagree? The Gemara explains: One Sage, 岣nanya, holds that the entrance was positioned in the south, and therefore the High Priest begins the sprinklings from that side. And one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the entrance was positioned in the north, and he therefore begins to sprinkle on the altar from the north side.

讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诪讬讛讗 讛讬讻讗 讚讙诪专谉 诪转谞讜转 讚拽专谞讜转 讛转诐 讬讛讬讘 注诇 讙讙讜 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讟讛专讜 讜拽讚砖讜 诪拽讜诐 砖拽讚砖讜 砖诐 讟讬讛专讜

The Gemara comments: Everyone agrees in any case that in the place where he finishes the presentations of the corners, that is where he places the blood on the altar鈥檚 top. They disagree only about the location of the final presentation, whether it is on the south or the north side. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this agreement? The Gemara answers that the verse states: 鈥淎nd he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it and sanctify it鈥 (Leviticus 16:19), which indicates that the place he sanctified by sprinkling blood, the corner of the altar where he sprinkled last, there he shall also begin to cleanse and sprinkle on top.

砖讬专讬 讛讚诐 讛讬讛 砖讜驻讱 注诇 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬 砖诇 诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讗转 讻诇 讚诐 讛驻专 讬砖驻讜讱 讜讻讬 谞驻讬拽 讘讛讛讜讗 驻讙注 讘专讬砖讗

搂 The mishna taught: And he would pour the remainder of the blood on the western base of the outer altar. The Gemara explains: The reason is that the verse states with regard to the sin-offering bull of the High Priest during the rest of the year: 鈥淎nd he shall pour out all the blood of the bull at the base of the altar of burnt-offering, which is at the door of the Tent of Meeting鈥 (Leviticus 4:7), and when he goes out from the Sanctuary to pour the remainder of the blood, he first reaches that western side of the base of the altar.

讜砖诇 诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讛讬讛 砖讜驻讱 注诇 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讬住讜讚 讛诪讝讘讞 讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 讗转讛 讗讜诪专 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 讗讜 讗讬谞讜 讗诇讗 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬转

搂 The mishna further taught: And he would pour the remaining blood after the blood of an offering was sprinkled on the outer altar, on its southern base. The Sages taught in a baraita: 鈥淭he base of the altar鈥 (Leviticus 4:30), which is mentioned with regard to pouring the remainder of the blood of an individual offering, is the southern base. Do you say it is the southern base? Or perhaps that is not the case, but rather it is the western base?

讗诪专转 讬诇诪讚 讬专讬讚转讜 诪谉 讛讻讘砖 诇讬爪讬讗转讜 诪谉 讛讛讬讻诇 诪讛 讬爪讬讗转讜 诪谉 讛讛讬讻诇 讘住诪讜讱 诇讜 讜讗讬 讝讛 讝讛 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬 讗祝 讬专讬讚转讜 诪谉 讛讻讘砖 讘住诪讜讱 诇讜 讜讗讬 讝讛 讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬

You said: Let his descent from the ramp of the outer altar after sprinkling blood from the sin-offerings be derived from his exit from the Sanctuary with the remaining blood in his hand: Just as upon his exit from the Sanctuary he pours the remainder of the blood on the side closest to him, and which is that, it is the western base; so too, upon his descent from the ramp of the outer altar after sprinkling blood from a sin-offering, he pours the blood on the side closest to him, and which is that? It is the southern base, as when he descends from the ramp he turns to the right, i.e., the east, which means the southern base is the one closest to him.

转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专 讝讛 讜讝讛 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讗讬 讗讜诪专 讝讛 讜讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬 讘砖诇诪讗 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 拽住讘专 讬诇诪讚 住转讜诐 诪诪驻讜专砖

It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael says: Both this and that, the blood of an inner sin-offering and that of an outer sin-offering, were spilled at the western base of the altar. Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i says: Both this and that blood were spilled at the southern base. The Gemara asks: Granted, Rabbi Yishmael maintains that the halakha of outer sin-offerings, which is not clarified in the Torah, is derived from the inner sin-offerings, whose halakha is explicit: Just as the remains of the inner sprinklings are poured at the western base, so too, the remains of the outer sprinklings are poured at the western base.

讗诇讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讗讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 拽住讘专 驻转讞讗 讘讚专讜诐 拽讗讬

However, with regard to Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i, what is the reason that he holds that both sets of remainders of blood are spilled at the southern base? Rav Ashi said: Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i maintains that the entrance of the Sanctuary is positioned at the south side of the altar, i.e., the altar is not located in the middle of the courtyard but to the north. Consequently, the southern base of the altar is closest to the High Priest鈥檚 exit from the Sanctuary.

转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘讚讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讗讬 讝讛 讜讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 讜住讬诪谞讬讱 诪砖讻讜讛 讙讘专讬 诇讙讘专讗

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught a different version of his opinion, which they learned in the school of Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i: Both this and that, the blood of an inner sin-offering and that of an outer sin-offering, were presented at the southern base. According to this version, Rabbi Yishmael changed his opinion and agreed with Rabbi Shimon. The Gemara comments: And your mnemonic to remember the shift in opinion is: The men pulled the man, i.e., the majority overruled the individual. In this case, the numerous students of Rabbi Shimon convinced the individual Sage, Rabbi Yishmael, to accept their ruling.

讗诇讜 讜讗诇讜 诪转注专讘讬谉 讘讗诪讛 讜讬讜爪讗讬谉 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讚诪讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讛谉

搂 It was taught in the mishna: These remainders of blood from the outer altar and those remainders of blood from the inner altar are mixed in the canal beneath the altar and flow out with the water used to rinse the area to the Kidron River, where they are sold to gardeners. Any blood that was not redeemed was subject to the prohibition against misuse of consecrated property. The Sages taught: One who takes these remainders without redeeming them misuses property consecrated in the Temple by unlawfully using blood, which is consecrated and is Temple property. It is prohibited to use consecrated objects for mundane purposes, and one who does so is committing the sin of misusing consecrated property. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon. And the Rabbis say: One does not misuse consecrated property by benefiting from these remainders of the blood of offerings.

注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讗诇讗 诪讚专讘谞谉 讗讘诇 诪讚讗讜专讬讬转讗 讗讬谉 诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讛谉

The Gemara comments: The Rabbis disagree only with regard to misuse of consecrated property that applies by rabbinic law, as it was the Sages who prohibited the use of blood; however, everyone agrees that by Torah law one does not misuse consecrated property by benefiting from these remainders of blood. Clearly, the Temple treasurers would not have sold it to gardeners ab initio had the Torah prohibited the use of this blood (Tosafot).

诪谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讗诪专 拽专讗 诇讻诐 砖诇讻诐 讬讛讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 转谞讗 诇讻驻专 诇讻驻专讛 谞转转讬讜 讜诇讗 诇诪注讬诇讛

The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that there is no misuse for blood, derived? Ulla said that the verse states: 鈥淔or the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls鈥 (Leviticus 17:11). 鈥淭o you鈥 indicates that it shall be yours. It is not the property of the Temple; rather, it belongs to all of the Jewish people. The school of Rabbi Shimon likewise taught that the phrase 鈥渢o make atonement鈥 teaches that God says: I gave it for atonement and not for the prohibition against misuse of consecrated objects.

讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讗诪专 拽专讗 讛讜讗 诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 讻诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 诪讛 诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 讗讬谉 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛 讗祝 诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 讗讬谉 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛

And Rabbi Yo岣nan said that this halakha is derived from a different phrase. The verse states: 鈥淔or it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life鈥 (Leviticus 17:11), which indicates that it retains the same status before atonement as after atonement: Just as after atonement it is not subject to the prohibition against misuse of consecrated objects, as the mitzva has been performed, so too, before atonement it is not subject to misuse of consecrated objects. As the Gemara states below, there is a general principle that once the mitzva involving a certain object has been performed, the object is no longer subject to misuse of consecrated objects.

讜讗讬诪讗 诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 讻诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 诪讛 诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 讬砖 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛 讗祝 诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 讬砖 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛 讗讬谉 诇讱 讚讘专 砖谞注砖讬转 诪爪讜转讜 讜诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讜 讜诇讗 讜讛专讬 转专讜诪转 讛讚砖谉

The Gemara asks: But if the status of blood before atonement is compared to its status after atonement, one can say the opposite: Just as before atonement it is subject to misuse of consecrated objects, so too, after atonement it is subject to misuse of consecrated objects. The Gemara rejects this contention: This cannot be the case, as there is a general principle: There is nothing whose mitzva has been performed that is still subject to misuse of consecrated property. The Gemara asks: And is there no such case? But there is the instance of the removal of the ashes of offerings burned on the altar. These ashes require burial, and yet any benefit derived from them is misuse of consecrated property, despite the fact that their mitzva has already been performed.

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 Josh Sussman in honor of both his wife, Romi鈥檚 50th birthday and son, Zeli. "He will, B鈥橢zrat HaShem, be making his first solo siyum on Masechet Yoma at his Bar Mitzvah in July".

And for a refuah shleima for Pesha Etel bat Sarah.

  • This month's shiurim are sponsored by Shoshana Shur for the refuah Shlema of Meira Bat Zelda Zahava.

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 58 – 63 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time

This week we will learn about the blood application on the Golden Alter and the order and direction that it...
talking talmud_square

Yoma 59: Is There Revelation through Blood?

Sprinkling on the "pure" of the altar - the Gemara puzzles out what this pure is. Possibly, the midpoint of...
drainage channel

Down in the Valley

We have been talking a lot about blood for the past few days. Sorry to all the squeamish folks out...

Yoma 59

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Yoma 59

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讗讬 住讘讬专讗 诇谉 讛拽驻讛 讘专讙诇 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讬诇驻讬谞谉 驻谞讬诐 诪讞讜抓 讜讛讻讗 讘讛讗 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘专讙诇

And if you wish, say instead: If we hold that the encircling is performed by foot, i.e., the priest walks around the inner altar, everyone agrees that we learn the method of sprinkling inside from the sprinkling outside. And here they disagree about this matter: One Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that the priest stands in his place and sprinkles on all the corners from there, which means his encircling is performed by hand; and one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the encircling is done by foot.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜讛讻讗 讘讛讗 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 讬诇驻讬谞谉 讬讚 诪专讙诇 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗 讬诇驻讬谞谉

And if you wish, say instead: Everyone agrees that the encircling was performed by hand, and here they disagree about this matter: One Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that we derive the halakhot of an encircling performed by hand from those of an encircling by foot, and therefore the ritual of the inner altar is the same as that of the outer altar. And one Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that we do not derive the encircling performed by hand from the encircling done by foot.

讜住讘专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讙诇讬诇讬 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜讛讗 诪讚拽转谞讬 住讬驻讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 诪讻诇诇 讚转谞讗 拽诪讗 诇讗 住讘讬专讗 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 诪讞讜讜专转讗 讻讚砖谞讬谞谉 诪注讬拽专讗 诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘讬讚 讜诪专 住讘专 讛拽驻讛 讘专讙诇

搂 The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Yosei HaGelili hold that the encircling is performed by hand? But from the fact that it is taught in the latter clause of the mishna that Rabbi Eliezer says: He stood in one place and sprinkled the blood from there, it can be learned by inference that the first tanna, whom the Gemara identified as Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, does not maintain that the rite is performed in this manner. Rather, it is clear as we originally answered, that one Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that the encircling is performed by hand; and one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the encircling is performed by foot.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讛讗 拽讗 诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讻住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讜诪专 住讘专 讻讜诇讬讛 诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讘诪拽讜诐 讞讚讗 拽专谉 讚诪讝讘讞 讞讬爪讜谉 拽讗讬

And if you wish, say instead that they disagree about this matter: One Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that the perimeter of the inner altar is like the perimeter of the outer altar, and one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the entire inner altar stands in place of one corner of the outer altar. Since the entire inner altar is only one cubit by one cubit, like a single corner of the outer altar, the halakhot of the outer altar are not relevant to the inner altar.

转谞讬讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 砖谞讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐 谞砖转讬讬专讜 讘诪拽讚砖 专讗砖讜谉 讝讛 讗讜诪专 讘讬讚讬 讛拽驻转讬 讜讝讛 讗讜诪专 讘专讙诇讬 讛拽驻转讬 讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜 讜讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜

It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael said: Two High Priests remained from the days of the First Temple. This one says: I encircled by hand and sprinkled, and I did not encircle the perimeter of the inner altar by foot. And that one says: I encircled by foot. This one gave a reason for his statement, and that one gave a reason for his statement.

讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜 住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讻住讘讬讘 讚诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讜讝讛 谞讜转谉 讟注诐 诇讚讘专讬讜 讻讜诇讬讛 诪讝讘讞 驻谞讬诪讬 讘诪拽讜诐 讞讚讗 拽专谉 讚讞讬爪讜谉 拽讗讬

The one who said that he encircled by foot gave the following reason for his statement: The perimeter of the inner altar is like the perimeter of the outer altar, which is encircled by foot for sprinkling. And the one who said that he encircled by hand gave the following reason for his statement: The entire inner altar stands in place of one corner of the outer altar. Just as for one corner of the outer altar, the priest sprinkles the blood by hand, the same applies to the entire inner altar.

专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 讛讬讛 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪谞讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 讜注诇 讻讜诇谉 讛讬讛 谞讜转谉 诪诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 讞讜抓 诪讗讜转讛 砖讘讗诇讻住讜谉 砖谞讜转谉 诪诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛

搂 It was taught in the mishna that Rabbi Eliezer says: He stood in one place and sprinkled the blood from there. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is the mishna? The Gemara answers: The mishna is taught in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who explained Rabbi Eliezer鈥檚 ruling in the following manner. As it was taught in a baraita, later tanna鈥檌m disagreed with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Meir says that Rabbi Eliezer says as follows: He stood in one place and sprinkled, and on all of the corners he presented the blood from above downward, so as not to drip blood down the sleeve of his garment, except for that corner on the diagonal [alakhson] across from him. Since it was difficult for him to sprinkle on that corner from top to bottom, he sprinkled from below upward.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专 讘诪拽讜诪讜 注讜诪讚 讜诪讞讟讗 讜注诇 讻讜诇谉 讛讜讗 谞讜转谉 诪诇诪讟讛 诇诪注诇讛 讞讜抓 诪讝讜 砖讛讬转讛 诇驻谞讬讜 诪诪砖 砖谞讜转谉 诪诪注诇讛 诇诪讟讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 谞讬转讜讜住谉 诪讗谞讬讛

Conversely, Rabbi Yehuda says that Rabbi Eliezer says: He stood in one place and sprinkled, and on all of the corners he sprinkled from below upward, as it is more convenient to sprinkle in that manner, except for that one which was directly before him, on which he would present from above downward. The reason is so as not to dirty his garments with blood. If he sprinkled on the corner next to him from below upward, the blood might fall on his clothes, and he would have to change garments, as dirty priestly garments may not be worn for the Temple service.

讛讝讛 诪诪谞讜 注诇 讟讛专讜 砖诇 诪讝讘讞 诪讗讬 讟讛专讜 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 驻诇讙讬讛 讚诪讝讘讞 讻讚讗诪专讬 讗讬谞砖讬 讟讛专 讟讬讛专讗 讜讛讜讬 驻诇讙讬讛 讚讬讜诪讗

搂 The mishna taught: He sprinkled blood on the pure gold [tohoro] of the altar. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the term tohoro? Rabba bar Rav Sheila said: It means half of the altar, as people commonly say: Tehar tihara, the light of noon shines and it is the middle of the day. Here, too, tohoro of the altar means half the altar, i.e., he sprinkled on the midpoint of the altar wall.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讻砖讛讜讗 诪讝讛 讗讬谞讜 诪讝讛 诇讗 注诇 讙讘讬 讛讗驻专 讜诇讗 注诇 讙讘讬 讛讙讞诇讬诐 讗诇讗 讞讜转讛 讙讞诇讬诐 讗讬诇讱 讜讗讬诇讱 讜诪讝讛 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 注诇 讙诇讜讬讛 讚诪讝讘讞 讻讚讻转讬讘 讜讻注爪诐 讛砖诪讬诐 诇讟讜讛专

The Gemara raises an objection: When he sprinkles on the inner altar, he sprinkles neither on top of the ash nor on top of the coals; rather, he rakes and removes the coals to both sides and sprinkles. This indicates that this sprinkling was performed on top of the altar, not on its side. Rather, Rabba bar Rav Sheila retracted his previous interpretation and said: On tohoro of the altar means on the exposed area of the altar, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the like of the very heaven for clearness [letohar]鈥 (Exodus 24:10), which shows that tohar is an expression of clarity.

转谞讬讗 讞谞谞讬讗 讗讜诪专 讘爪讚 爪驻讜谞讬 讛讜讗 谞讜转谉 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘爪讚 讚专讜诪讬 讛讜讗 谞讜转谉 讘诪讗讬 拽诪讬驻诇讙讬 诪专 住讘专 驻讬转讞讗 讘讚专讜诐 拽讗讬 讜诪专 住讘专 驻讬转讞讗 讘爪驻讜谉 拽讗讬

It was taught in a baraita that 岣nanya says: The priest presents seven sprinklings on the north side of the altar, and Rabbi Yosei says: He presents them on the south side. The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do they disagree? The Gemara explains: One Sage, 岣nanya, holds that the entrance was positioned in the south, and therefore the High Priest begins the sprinklings from that side. And one Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the entrance was positioned in the north, and he therefore begins to sprinkle on the altar from the north side.

讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诪讬讛讗 讛讬讻讗 讚讙诪专谉 诪转谞讜转 讚拽专谞讜转 讛转诐 讬讛讬讘 注诇 讙讙讜 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讟讛专讜 讜拽讚砖讜 诪拽讜诐 砖拽讚砖讜 砖诐 讟讬讛专讜

The Gemara comments: Everyone agrees in any case that in the place where he finishes the presentations of the corners, that is where he places the blood on the altar鈥檚 top. They disagree only about the location of the final presentation, whether it is on the south or the north side. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this agreement? The Gemara answers that the verse states: 鈥淎nd he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it and sanctify it鈥 (Leviticus 16:19), which indicates that the place he sanctified by sprinkling blood, the corner of the altar where he sprinkled last, there he shall also begin to cleanse and sprinkle on top.

砖讬专讬 讛讚诐 讛讬讛 砖讜驻讱 注诇 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬 砖诇 诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讗转 讻诇 讚诐 讛驻专 讬砖驻讜讱 讜讻讬 谞驻讬拽 讘讛讛讜讗 驻讙注 讘专讬砖讗

搂 The mishna taught: And he would pour the remainder of the blood on the western base of the outer altar. The Gemara explains: The reason is that the verse states with regard to the sin-offering bull of the High Priest during the rest of the year: 鈥淎nd he shall pour out all the blood of the bull at the base of the altar of burnt-offering, which is at the door of the Tent of Meeting鈥 (Leviticus 4:7), and when he goes out from the Sanctuary to pour the remainder of the blood, he first reaches that western side of the base of the altar.

讜砖诇 诪讝讘讞 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讛讬讛 砖讜驻讱 注诇 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讬住讜讚 讛诪讝讘讞 讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 讗转讛 讗讜诪专 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 讗讜 讗讬谞讜 讗诇讗 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬转

搂 The mishna further taught: And he would pour the remaining blood after the blood of an offering was sprinkled on the outer altar, on its southern base. The Sages taught in a baraita: 鈥淭he base of the altar鈥 (Leviticus 4:30), which is mentioned with regard to pouring the remainder of the blood of an individual offering, is the southern base. Do you say it is the southern base? Or perhaps that is not the case, but rather it is the western base?

讗诪专转 讬诇诪讚 讬专讬讚转讜 诪谉 讛讻讘砖 诇讬爪讬讗转讜 诪谉 讛讛讬讻诇 诪讛 讬爪讬讗转讜 诪谉 讛讛讬讻诇 讘住诪讜讱 诇讜 讜讗讬 讝讛 讝讛 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬 讗祝 讬专讬讚转讜 诪谉 讛讻讘砖 讘住诪讜讱 诇讜 讜讗讬 讝讛 讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬

You said: Let his descent from the ramp of the outer altar after sprinkling blood from the sin-offerings be derived from his exit from the Sanctuary with the remaining blood in his hand: Just as upon his exit from the Sanctuary he pours the remainder of the blood on the side closest to him, and which is that, it is the western base; so too, upon his descent from the ramp of the outer altar after sprinkling blood from a sin-offering, he pours the blood on the side closest to him, and which is that? It is the southern base, as when he descends from the ramp he turns to the right, i.e., the east, which means the southern base is the one closest to him.

转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专 讝讛 讜讝讛 讬住讜讚 诪注专讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讗讬 讗讜诪专 讝讛 讜讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬 讘砖诇诪讗 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 拽住讘专 讬诇诪讚 住转讜诐 诪诪驻讜专砖

It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael says: Both this and that, the blood of an inner sin-offering and that of an outer sin-offering, were spilled at the western base of the altar. Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i says: Both this and that blood were spilled at the southern base. The Gemara asks: Granted, Rabbi Yishmael maintains that the halakha of outer sin-offerings, which is not clarified in the Torah, is derived from the inner sin-offerings, whose halakha is explicit: Just as the remains of the inner sprinklings are poured at the western base, so too, the remains of the outer sprinklings are poured at the western base.

讗诇讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讗讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 拽住讘专 驻转讞讗 讘讚专讜诐 拽讗讬

However, with regard to Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i, what is the reason that he holds that both sets of remainders of blood are spilled at the southern base? Rav Ashi said: Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i maintains that the entrance of the Sanctuary is positioned at the south side of the altar, i.e., the altar is not located in the middle of the courtyard but to the north. Consequently, the southern base of the altar is closest to the High Priest鈥檚 exit from the Sanctuary.

转谞讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘讚讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讬讜讞讗讬 讝讛 讜讝讛 讬住讜讚 讚专讜诪讬转 讜住讬诪谞讬讱 诪砖讻讜讛 讙讘专讬 诇讙讘专讗

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught a different version of his opinion, which they learned in the school of Rabbi Shimon ben Yo岣i: Both this and that, the blood of an inner sin-offering and that of an outer sin-offering, were presented at the southern base. According to this version, Rabbi Yishmael changed his opinion and agreed with Rabbi Shimon. The Gemara comments: And your mnemonic to remember the shift in opinion is: The men pulled the man, i.e., the majority overruled the individual. In this case, the numerous students of Rabbi Shimon convinced the individual Sage, Rabbi Yishmael, to accept their ruling.

讗诇讜 讜讗诇讜 诪转注专讘讬谉 讘讗诪讛 讜讬讜爪讗讬谉 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讚诪讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讛谉

搂 It was taught in the mishna: These remainders of blood from the outer altar and those remainders of blood from the inner altar are mixed in the canal beneath the altar and flow out with the water used to rinse the area to the Kidron River, where they are sold to gardeners. Any blood that was not redeemed was subject to the prohibition against misuse of consecrated property. The Sages taught: One who takes these remainders without redeeming them misuses property consecrated in the Temple by unlawfully using blood, which is consecrated and is Temple property. It is prohibited to use consecrated objects for mundane purposes, and one who does so is committing the sin of misusing consecrated property. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon. And the Rabbis say: One does not misuse consecrated property by benefiting from these remainders of the blood of offerings.

注讚 讻讗谉 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讗诇讗 诪讚专讘谞谉 讗讘诇 诪讚讗讜专讬讬转讗 讗讬谉 诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讛谉

The Gemara comments: The Rabbis disagree only with regard to misuse of consecrated property that applies by rabbinic law, as it was the Sages who prohibited the use of blood; however, everyone agrees that by Torah law one does not misuse consecrated property by benefiting from these remainders of blood. Clearly, the Temple treasurers would not have sold it to gardeners ab initio had the Torah prohibited the use of this blood (Tosafot).

诪谞讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讗诪专 拽专讗 诇讻诐 砖诇讻诐 讬讛讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 转谞讗 诇讻驻专 诇讻驻专讛 谞转转讬讜 讜诇讗 诇诪注讬诇讛

The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that there is no misuse for blood, derived? Ulla said that the verse states: 鈥淔or the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls鈥 (Leviticus 17:11). 鈥淭o you鈥 indicates that it shall be yours. It is not the property of the Temple; rather, it belongs to all of the Jewish people. The school of Rabbi Shimon likewise taught that the phrase 鈥渢o make atonement鈥 teaches that God says: I gave it for atonement and not for the prohibition against misuse of consecrated objects.

讜专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诪专 讗诪专 拽专讗 讛讜讗 诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 讻诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 诪讛 诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 讗讬谉 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛 讗祝 诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 讗讬谉 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛

And Rabbi Yo岣nan said that this halakha is derived from a different phrase. The verse states: 鈥淔or it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life鈥 (Leviticus 17:11), which indicates that it retains the same status before atonement as after atonement: Just as after atonement it is not subject to the prohibition against misuse of consecrated objects, as the mitzva has been performed, so too, before atonement it is not subject to misuse of consecrated objects. As the Gemara states below, there is a general principle that once the mitzva involving a certain object has been performed, the object is no longer subject to misuse of consecrated objects.

讜讗讬诪讗 诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 讻诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 诪讛 诇驻谞讬 讻驻专讛 讬砖 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛 讗祝 诇讗讞专 讻驻专讛 讬砖 讘讜 诪注讬诇讛 讗讬谉 诇讱 讚讘专 砖谞注砖讬转 诪爪讜转讜 讜诪讜注诇讬谉 讘讜 讜诇讗 讜讛专讬 转专讜诪转 讛讚砖谉

The Gemara asks: But if the status of blood before atonement is compared to its status after atonement, one can say the opposite: Just as before atonement it is subject to misuse of consecrated objects, so too, after atonement it is subject to misuse of consecrated objects. The Gemara rejects this contention: This cannot be the case, as there is a general principle: There is nothing whose mitzva has been performed that is still subject to misuse of consecrated property. The Gemara asks: And is there no such case? But there is the instance of the removal of the ashes of offerings burned on the altar. These ashes require burial, and yet any benefit derived from them is misuse of consecrated property, despite the fact that their mitzva has already been performed.

Scroll To Top