Yoma 60

באחולי עבודה קא מיפלגי לבן זומא מחיל עבודה לר"י לא מחיל עבודה

As to whether the service is profaned.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By officiating without immersing first.');">¹</span> According to Ben Zoma<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who infers it from an argument a minori which has the force of Biblical law.');">²</span>

ולבן זומא מי מחיל והתניא כהן גדול שלא טבל ולא קידש בין בגד לבגד ובין עבודה לעבודה עבודתו כשרה אחד כהן גדול ואחד כהן הדיוט שלא קידש ידיו ורגליו שחרית ועבד עבודה עבודתו פסולה

he profanes the service, according to R'Judah he does not. But does he, in accordance with Ben Zoma's view, profane the service?

אלא למיקם בעשה קא מיפלגי לבן זומא קאי בעשה לר' יהודה לא קאי בעשה

Has it not been taught: If a high priest did not immerse or sanctify himself between garment and garment or between service and service, his service remains valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 19b. [Since a high priest does not profane the service by failing to take the intermediary immersions, there could be no profanation of the service in the absence of the first immersion, since on the view of Ben Zoma the latter is inferred from the former.]');">³</span> But if either a high priest or a common priest has not washed his hands and feet in the morning and then had officiated at a service, that service is invalidated? - Rather does the dispute concern the question as to whether he transgresses a positive command or not,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By officiating without immersing first.');">¹</span>

ומי אית ליה לר' יהודה האי סברא והתניא מצורע טובל ועומד בשער ניקנור רבי יהודה אומר אינו צריך טבילה שכבר טבל מבערב

Ben Zoma holding he transgresses a positive command, R'Judah that he does not. But does R'Judah hold this view?

ההוא כדתני טעמא שכבר טבל מבערב

Has it not been taught: A leper<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the eighth day of his affliction, although he had immersed himself on the seventh, Lev. XIV, 9: And it shall be on the seventh...he shall bathe his flesh in water, and he shall be clean. Yet, when he offers up the prescribed sacrifices on the eighth day, he shall immerse himself again.');">⁴</span> immerses himself and stands in the Nicanor Gate.

ודקארי לה מאי קארי לה משום דקא בעי למרמא אחריתי עליה לשכת המצורעין ששם מצורעין טובלין ר"י אומר לא מצורעין בלבד אמרו אלא כל אדם

R'Judah said: He does not need to immerse himself, for he has done so already on the evening before! This has its own reason, as it was taught: 'Because he had immersed himself on the eve before'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Judah holds the purpose of the immersion of those who enter the Sanctuary in the morning is just to remind them of their former uncleanness, whereas the leper, who by reason of last night's immersion got rid of his uncleanness, is not in need of another reminder, in form of a second immersion.');">⁵</span> What does he ask who asks this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., why ask an apparently unnecessary question? The answer is obvious. Mielziner (Introduction p. 238) cites Frankel MGWJ 1861 for a tradition according to which all passages in the Talmud introduced by this phrase belong to the additions made by the Saboraim.');">⁶</span>

לא קשיא הא דטביל הא דלא טביל אי דלא טביל הערב שמש בעי אלא אידי ואידי דטביל הא דאסח דעתיה הא דלא אסח דעתיה

- Because he wants to raise another objection, viz. , [why was it called] the cell of the lepers, because lepers immerse themselves therein.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Before they entered the Temple Court on the eighth day in the morning; when standing at the Nicanor Gate they thrust their thumb and toe into the Temple Court, there to receive an application of the blood of the guilt-offering and of oil; v. Lev. XIV, 14ff and supra ');">⁷</span> R'Judah says: Not only of the lepers did they say [this] but of every man [who enters the Temple Court]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Not only of the lepers' implies the lepers at any rate, hence he would consider a re-immersion necessary, which contradicts his earlier statement.');">⁸</span>

אי אסח דעתיה הזאת שלישי ושביעי בעי דאמר ר' דוסתאי בר מתון אמר רבי יוחנן הסח הדעת צריך הזאה שלישי ושביעי

- That is no difficulty. One statement refers to the case that he immersed himself, the other to the case that he did not.

אלא אידי ואידי דלא אסח דעתיה ולא קשיא הא דטביל על דעת ביאת מקדש הא דלא טביל על דעת ביאת מקדש ואב"א תני לא מצורעין אמרו אלא כל אדם

But, if he did not immerse himself, he must await the setting of the sun? - Rather: In both cases he is presumed to have immersed himself, but in the one case he is presumed to have ceased to have his mind [on the necessity of preventing defilement],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By consistent guarding of his body against touch by agents of ritual uncleanness.');">⁹</span> in the other he is presumed to have had his mind thereon all the time.

רבינא אמר רבי יהודה לדבריהם דרבנן קאמר להו לדידי מצורע אין צריך טבילה לדידכו אודו לי איזי מיהת דלא מצורעין בלבד אמרו אלא כל אדם ורבנן מצורע דייש בטומאה כל אדם לא דיישי בטומאה

But if he ceased to have his mind on it, he would need to be sprinkled on the third and the seventh day, for R'Dosthai B'Mattun said in the name of R'Johanan: Wherever attention<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he may have entered the tent in which a corpse lay.');">¹⁰</span> [from the need to prevent uncleanness] is diverted, sprinkling on the third and the seventh day is required?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For entering the Temple.');">¹¹</span>

א"ל אביי לרב יוסף נימא רבנן דפליגי עליה דר"י כבן זומא סבירא להו והאי דקתני מצורע להודיעך כחו דר"י או דילמא שאני מצורע דדייש בטומאה א"ל שאני מצורע דדייש בטומאה

- Rather: In both cases he is presumed not to have diverted the attention, yet there is no contradiction, for in the one case he is presumed to have immersed himself for the purpose of entering the Sanctuary, in the other he is assumed to have done so without that purpose in mind.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He therefore requires a second immersion in the morning.');">¹²</span> Or, if you like, say: Read not of lepers did they say [this]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Requiring immersion on entering the Sanctuary.');">¹³</span>

א"ל אביי לרב יוסף (לר"י דאמר סרך) טבילה (היא) זו

but of every man. Rabina said: R'Judah makes his statement only on behalf [of the view] of the Rabbis: As far as my view is concerned, no leper needs [another] immersion. But according to your opinion, admit at least that this was said not of lepers alone but of all people. And the Rabbis?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How would they meet R. Judah's argument?');">¹⁴</span> - The leper is accustomed to [his] impurity, all others are unaccustomed to it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence he will no more pay attention to the dangers of defilement, whereas all others, unaccustomed to uncleanness and not reconciled to it, will be anxious to avoid such risk.');">¹⁵</span> Shall we say that the Rabbis who dispute with R'Judah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And hold that a leper needs re-immersion on the eighth day.');">¹⁶</span> are of the opinion of Ben Zoma,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who requires no morning immersion even in the case of a leper who is accustomed to uncleanness.');">¹⁷</span> notwithstanding which they make reference to the leper,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although they hold with Ben Zoma that every one entering the Sanctuary is by the law of the Torah obliged to immerse himself.');">¹⁸</span> to inform you of the far-reaching consequences of R'Judah's opinion; or perhaps the difference in the case of the leper lies in the fact that he is accustomed to the uncleanness?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That of leprosy, hence is accustomed to touch things unclean, whence the assumption that even after his immersion he may have done so; but other men require no morning immersion Biblically before entering the Sanctuary.');">¹⁹</span> - He answered: It is different with the leper, because he is accustomed to his uncleanness. Said Abaye to R'Joseph:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Text in accord with Maharsha.');">²⁰</span> Would an intervening object