Halakhah for Yoma 136:20
שינה הוא דלא הא הלוכי מהלכי בדין הוא דהלוכי נמי לא
HE WHO SEES THE HIGH PRIEST WHEN HE READS DOES NOT SEE THE BULLOCK AND THE HE-GOAT THAT ARE BEING BURNT, AND HE THAT SEES THE BULLOCK AND THE HE-GOAT THAT ARE BEING BURNT DOES NOT SEE THE HIGH PRIEST WHEN HE READS: NOT THAT HE WAS NOT PERMITTED BUT BECAUSE THE DISTANCE APART WAS GREAT AND BOTH RITES WERE PERFORMED AT THE SAME TIME. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Since it states: IN HIS OWN WHITE VESTMENT,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Robe, garment; either the Greek stole, or a derivation of talal, cf. talith - Jast, and does not necessitate sacred priestly vestments.');"><sup>19</sup></span> the inference is that reading is not a [Temple] service, and then it states: IF HE WISHED TO READ IN THE LINEN GARMENTS HE COULD DO SO, from which one may learn that priestly garments may be enjoyed for private use!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For private clean use, as against the possibility of impurity in sleep.');"><sup>20</sup></span> Perhaps it is different with reading, because it is a necessity for the [Temple] service. For the question was raised: Are the priestly garments allowed for private use or not allowed! - Come and hear: They would nor sleep in the holy garments.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tamid 25b.');"><sup>21</sup></span> Now they could not sleep in them, but they could eat in them!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although eating is not part of the service, it is permissible for priests to eat in their official garments.');"><sup>22</sup></span> - Perhaps it is different with the eating, because it is necessary for the service, for it was taught: And they shall eat those things wherewith atonement was made;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXIX, 23.');"><sup>23</sup></span> this teaches that the priests eat and the owner obtains atonement.' They could not sleep in them', but could they walk around in them? - In truth they might not walk around in them either