Yoma 6

ועשה לך משלך אלא למ"ד משל צבור מאי איכא למימר

aseh leka<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. X, 2.');">¹</span> ['make thee'] mean 'make from thy own means', but what could be said [in the argument above] according to the opinion [that kah leka<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Must not be taken literally.');">²</span> means 'take for thyself] from the community funds', for we have been taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Men. 28b.');">³</span> The expression 'kah leka' means 'mi-sheleka [from thy own] and 'aseh leka means mi-sheleka [taken from thy own funds], but we-yikehu eleka<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXVII, 20.');">⁴</span>

דתניא קח לך משלך ועשה לך משלך ויקחו אליך משל צבור דברי רבי יאשיה ר' יונתן אומר בין קח לך בין ויקחו אליך משל צבור ומה תלמוד לומר קח לך כביכול משלך אני רוצה יותר משלהם

means [they shall take for them] from community funds; these are the words of R'Josiah; R'Jonathan said, Both 'kah leka' and 'we-yikehu eleka' mean from community funds, and what is intimated by saying 'kah leka' [take thee]? As it were,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If it were possible to assume such intimation from God.');">⁵</span> 'I prefer your own [private means expended on this work] to the community's [expenditure]'. ⁶ and another,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXV, 10.');">⁷</span>

אבא חנן אמר משום ר' אלעזר כתוב אחד אומר (דברים י, א) ועשית לך ארון עץ וכתוב אחד אומר (שמות כה, י) ועשו ארון עצי שטים הא כיצד כאן בזמן שישראל עושין רצונו של מקום כאן בזמן שאין עושין רצונו של מקום

And they shall make an ark of acacia-wood,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In one verse the making is demanded of Moses, in the other of the children of Israel.');">⁸</span> how is that?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Contradiction to be explained.');">⁹</span> Here it refers to a time when Israel act in accordance with His will,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When Israel fulfil God's will, it is they who get the credit for enabling Moses to perform His will. Otherwise all the credit is given to Moses.');">¹⁰</span> there it deals with a time when they do not act in accordance with His will"&gt; - They<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' l.e., R. Josiah and R. Jonathan. Here follows the reply to the question, how meet the above argument in the view of R. Jonathan who holds that 'kah leka' means 'take for them from community funds'.');">¹¹</span>

עד כאן לא פליגי אלא בקיחות דעלמא ועשיות דעלמא קיחות דעלמא (שמות ל, לד) קח לך סמים עשיות דעלמא (במדבר י, ב) עשה לך שתי חצוצרות כסף אבל הנך פרושי קא מפרש דמשלך הוא במלואים מכדי כתיב (ויקרא ט, ג) ואל בני ישראל תדבר לאמר קחו שעיר עזים לחטאת ויאמר אל אהרן קח לך עגל בן בקר לחטאת למה לי שמע מינה קח לך משלך הוא

are disputing only as to the general meaning [of the word 'leka'] in connection with the command to 'take' or to 'do', as e.g. , Take thou also unto thee the chief spices,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXX 34.');">¹²</span> or Make thee two trumpets of silver,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. X, 2.');">¹³</span> but in the above cases<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In connection with the offerings of the high priest on the Day of Atonement and the eighth day of the Consecration.');">¹⁴</span> it is clearl indicated in the text that it is from thine own.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The private means of the high priest.');">¹⁵</span>

ביום הכפורים מכדי כתיב (ויקרא טז, ג) בזאת יבא אהרן אל הקדש בפר בן בקר לחטאת וגו' (ויקרא טז, ה) ומאת עדת בני ישראל יקח שני שעירי עזים לחטאת והקריב את פר החטאת אשר לו למה לי שמע מינה האי לו משלו הוא

For consider in [the portion of the Bible dealing with the] consecration of the priests, it is written: And unto the children of Israel thou shalt speak, saying: Take ye a he-goat for a sin-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. IX, 3.');">¹⁶</span> why then the passage: And he said to Aaron: Take thee a bull-calf for a sin-offering?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. IX, 2.');">¹⁷</span> Conclude from this 'kah leka' means 'mi-sheleka', from your own. [Similarly] in connection with the Day of Atonement it reads: Herewith shall Aaron come into the holy place: with a young bullock for a sin-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 3.');">¹⁸</span>

רב אשי אמר דנין פר לחטאת ואיל לעולה מפר לחטאת ואיל לעולה לאפוקי ראש השנה ועצרת דתרוייהו עולות נינהו

etc. Why then the passage, And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XVI, 5.');">¹⁹</span> and And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is lo [for himself]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XVI, 6.');">²⁰</span> Conclude from this that the word 'lo' implies it is to be brought from his own means. R'Ashi<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He and Rabina deal with the questions raised as to why the analogy may not include other festivals besides the Day of Atonement.');">²¹</span>

רבינא אמר דנין עבודה בכהן גדול מעבודה בכהן גדול לאפוקי כולהו קושייתין דלאו עבודה בכהן גדול נינהו

said: It is legitimate to infer a case in which an ox is offered up as sin-offering and a ram as burnt-offering<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Day of Atonement the high priest offers up as his private sacrifice an ox for the sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering.');">²²</span> from another case in which an ox is offered up as sin-offering and a ram as a burnt-offering;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the eighth day of the consecration a young ox is offered up as sin-offering and a ram as burnt-offering.');">²³</span> this excludes from analogy New Year<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On Rosh ha-Shanah no ox is offered up as sin-offering, Num. XXIX, 1-6.');">²⁴</span> and Pentecost,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On 'Azereth (Shabuoth) no ox is offered up as sin-offering, ibid. XXVIII, 26-31.');">²⁵</span>

ואיכא דאמרי אמר רבינא דנין עבודה תחלה מעבודה תחלה לאפוקי הני דלאו תחלה נינהו מאי תחלה אילימא תחלה בכהן גדול היינו קמייתא אלא עבודה תחלה במקום מעבודה תחלה במקום

[as] in both cases both animals are offered up as burnt-offerings only. Rabina said: One may infer a service performed by the high priest<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Day of Atonement.');">²⁶</span> from another service performed by the high priest<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Consecration.');">²⁷</span> that excludes [the occasions mentioned] in all the questions [raised], because the services mentioned therein are not performed by the high priest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That answers all the questions raised.');">²⁸</span>

כי אתא רב דימי אמר ר' יוחנן מתני חדא [רבי יהושע בן לוי] מתני תרתי ר' יוחנן מתני חדא לעשות לכפר אלו מעשה יום הכפורים [וריב"ל] מתני תרתי לעשות אלו מעשה פרה לכפר אלו מעשה יום הכפורים

Others have this version of Rabina's reply: One may infer [certain rules for] a service held for the first time from a service held for the first time. This excludes all the other cases [referred to above], because none of them took place for the first time. What does this 'first time' mean? - Does it mean that the high priest had first performed service there?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first service ever performed by a high priest was that on the eighth day of the Consecration, hence it would be right to infer therefrom the service on the Day of Atonement, when the high priest for the first time offered up the community's sacrifice, on the first Day of Atonement.');">²⁹</span> That would be [the argument of Rabina's in] the first version.

ר' יוחנן מתני חדא והא אנן תנן שבעת ימים קודם יום הכפורים ושבעת ימים קודם שריפת הפרה מעלה בעלמא

No, it means the first service of its kind held in its place which may fitly be inferred from another service<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The service of the Day of Atonement took place in the Holy of Holies, which had never been entered before the first service on the first Day of Atonement, just as the Consecration Service included the first sacrifice on the outer altar, in priestly garments.');">³⁰</span> held for the first time in its place. When R'Dimi came<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Atha 'came' is the technical term for the return of scholars from Babylonia to Palestine and vice versa.');">³¹</span> [from Palestine], he said: R'Johanan taught one thing, R'Joshua B'Levi two.

והא א"ר מניומי בר חלקיה א"ר מחסיא בר אידי א"ר יוחנן כאשר עשה ביום הזה צוה ה' לעשות לכפר עליכם לעשות אלו מעשה פרה לכפר אלו מעשה יום הכפורים ההוא דרביה דכי אתא רבין אמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי ישמעאל לעשות אלו מעשה פרה לכפר אלו מעשה יום הכפורים

R'Johanan taught one thing the words 'la'asoth', 'lekapper'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lekapper being the explanation of la'asoth.');">³²</span> refer to the service of the Day of Atonement. R'Joshua B'Levi taught two things: 'la'asoth' means the ceremony of the [red] heifer, 'lekapper' refers to the service of the Day of Atonement. How could [you say that] R'Johanan taught [only] one thing?

א"ל ריש לקיש לרבי יוחנן מהיכא קא ילפת לה ממלואים אי מה מלואים כל הכתוב בהן מעכב בהן אף הכא נמי כל הכתוב בהן מעכב בהן

Have we not learnt in our Mishnah: SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THE DAY OF ATONEMENT, and in another Seven days before the burning of the heifer?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The priest in question was removed from his house, v. supra 2a.');">³³</span> - That<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The rule in connection with the burning of the red heifer.');">³⁴</span> is only a special provision.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because in some other respects there is latitude in connection with the heifer service (v. supra p. 1, n. 7) , some more stringent ordinances were decided upon, not, however as a matter of traditional law, but rather as an ad hoc regulation.');">³⁵</span> But did not R'Minyumi B'Hilkiah in the name of R'Mahsiah B'Idi, [and the latter] in the name of R'Johanan report the [interpretation of the text], ' hath been done this day, so hath the Lord commanded la'asoth [to do] lekapper 'alekem [to make atonement for you]'.'

וכי תימא הכי נמי והתנן ומתקינין לו כהן אחר ולא קתני מפרישין וכי תימא מאי מתקינין מפרישין ליתני או אידי ואידי מתקינין או אידי ואידי מפרישין

La'asoth' refers to the ceremony of the heifer and 'lekapper' to the service of the Day of Atonement?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This tradition in the name of R.Johanan is in evident conflict with the statement reported by R. Dimi.');">³⁶</span> This interpretation was that of his teacher.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He reported only his teacher's decision, but did not surrender his own opinion.');">³⁷</span> For when Rabina came [from Palestine]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 9, n. 10.');">³⁸</span> he said: R'Johanan reported in the name of R'Ishmael that 'la'asoth' referred to the ceremony of the heifer, and 'lekapper' to the work of the Day of Atonement.

א"ל אלא מר מהיכא יליף לה אמר מסיני דכתיב (שמות כד, טז) וישכון כבוד ה' על הר סיני ויכסהו הענן ששת ימים ויקרא אל משה ביום השביעי מכדי כתיב ויקרא אל משה ביום השביעי מאי ששת ימים זה בנה אב שכל הנכנס במחנה שכינה טעון פרישת ששה

Said Resh Lakish to R'Johanan: Whence do you infer this interpretation? From the Consecration Service?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra ');">³⁹</span> Hence, just as with the Consecration Service, the omission of any prescribed form would render the service invalid [would you say that] here too<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With regard to the ceremony of the red heifer.');">⁴⁰</span> the omission of anything prescribed [by inference from congruity of text] for that service, would render it invalid?

והא אנן שבעה תנן מתניתין רבי יהודה בן בתירא היא דחייש

And if you said: Yes, indeed, surely we learnt: ANOTHER PRIEST IS PREPARED TO TAKE HIS PLACE, not another priest is removed from his house!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that, if the high priest were prevented from officiating the substitute priest would perform the service without the necessary previous separation, which would render his service invalid and the ceremony unprovided with a priest.');">⁴¹</span> And if you would say MATHKININ [one prepares] and MAFRISHIN [one removes] mean the same thing, then the Mishnah ought to use in both passages either mathkinin or mafrishin!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the Mishnah deliberately uses two terms, their meaning must be different, hence Resh Lakish's question remains.');">⁴²</span> - [R'Johanan] said to him: And whence do you, Sir, infer it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The obligation to remove the priest from his house.');">⁴³</span> - He answered: From [the account concerning] Sinai. For the Scriptural text reads, And the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered him<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., Moses, R.V. 'it' referring to the mountain; v. infra 4a.');">⁴⁴</span> six days, and He called unto Moses on the seventh day.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXIV, 16.');">⁴⁵</span> Now consider: Since it is written 'and He called unto Moses on the seventh day', what do the 'six days' mean? They establish a rule<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'build a father', a precedent, i.e., justify the conclusion from this specifically stated law to other cases.');">⁴⁶</span> for anyone who enters the camp of the Shechinah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'royal residence', then Divine Presence, here the Divine Camp, the Sanctuary.');">⁴⁷</span> that he must remove himself from his house for six days. But we have learnt SEVEN?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Mishnah here speaks of a removal for seven days.');">⁴⁸</span> - Our Mishnah conforms to the opinion of R'Judah B'Bathyra who considers the possibility of the high priest's