Nazir 47b — the Talmud in English

But a High koen who became a koen by being “one of many garments” brings for his unintentional violation a female sheep or female goat as a sin-offering, like every person who sinned unintentionally; and it is likewise simple that a High koen

anointed with the anointing oil ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact folio position")

and

a High

koen who is one of many garments,

who were walking on the road, and they found a met mitzva:

A High koen

anointed with the anointing oil is preferable

not to become impure, but rather the one of many garments should become impure, and because:

For if

a High koen

anointed with the anointing oil brings “

the bull that comes for all the commandments,”

when he ruled for himself concerning one of all the commandments for which unintentional violation entails a sin-offering, and acted according to his ruling.

But

a High koen

who is one of many garments does not bring

a bull, but rather a female sheep or female goat, like any other person.

And it is likewise simple: a High koen

who has passed

from the High Priesthood,

and one of many garments

who is serving in the High Priesthood, who were walking on the road and found a met mitzva:

A High koen

who is one of many garments is preferable,

and the “anointed one who has passed” should become impure.

For

a High koen

who is one of many garments performs service [

he performs service as a High koen in the Temple ].

But

a High koen

who has passed is not fit for service

at all.

And it is likewise simple: a High koen who

passed

from his Priesthood

because of

the impurity of

his emission, and

a High koen who

passed because of his blemish,

who were walking on the road and found a met mitzva:

A High koen who

passed because of his emission is preferable,

and the one who passed because of his blemish should become impure, even if this was a temporary blemish.

For this one—

who passed because of his emission—indeed

is fit for service tomorrow

when he becomes pure from his emission.

But the one who passed because of his blemish is not fit for service

until his blemish is healed. All the laws enumerated until here are simple.

However,

they raised a question before them,

the members of the academy:

A High koen

anointed for war

and the deputy

of the High koen who were walking on the road and found a met mitzva,

which of them is preferable [

which of them is preferable, so that he should not become impure but rather his fellow ]?

And the Gemara explains the sides of the question:

Is a High koen

anointed for war preferable,

and he should not become impure, because

he is fit for war,

since he was appointed for the needs of the war and the many depend upon him—

or perhaps the deputy is preferable, since he is fit for service,

as he was appointed for the service of the High koen on Yom Kippur, if a disqualification should occur to the High koen.

Unlike the one anointed for war, who was not appointed for service at all.

Come and hear

from this

as it was explicitly taught

that the deputy is preferable:

There is no difference between the one anointed for war and the deputy,

there is no leniency that applies to the one anointed for war and does not apply to the deputy,

except

this leniency exists in the one anointed for war more than in the deputy:

If they were walking on the road and found a met mitzva, the one anointed for war should become impure, and the deputy should not become impure!

And we object:

But it was taught: The one anointed for war takes precedence over the deputy

to preserve his life.

If a wall fell upon both of them, the rubble is cleared first for the one anointed for war; and if so, we should say that also with regard to impurity from a met mitzva, the one anointed for war is preferable, and the deputy should become impure!?

Said

in answer

Mar Zutra:

With regard

to

preserving his life,

indeed

the one anointed for war is preferable.

What is the reason?—

Because

the many depend upon him [

the many depend upon him in war ]—

but

with regard to

impurity, the deputy is preferable,

since he was appointed for service.

For it was taught: Rabbi Hanina ben Antignos says: Why did they institute a deputy for the High koen?

If it should occur to him—

to the High koen—

a disqualification, then

the deputy

enters and serves in his place.

And here the Gemara returns to discuss the fundamental permission of impurity from a met mitzva for a nazir and a High koen:

Until here they disagreed

the Sages and Rabbi Eliezer in our Mishna

only concerning a High koen and a nazir when they go together [

when they are going together ]—who takes precedence over whom in becoming impure to a met mitzva—

but

when a nazir and a High koen go

each one separately [

each one alone ],

they are fit to become impure [

each one of them becomes impure to a met mitzva ].

And

from where are these words

that they are permitted to become impure to a met mitzva?

And the Gemara explains that it is learned from this

as the Sages taught:

It is stated in the section concerning the impurity of koanim [Leviticus 21]: “

And the Lord said to Moses: Say to the koanim, the sons of Aaron, and say to them: He shall not become impure among his people for a dead person. Except for his relative who is close to him, for his mother and for his father, and for his son and for his daughter, and for his brother. And for his sister, the virgin who is close to him, who has not been married to a man—for her he may become impure. He shall not become impure as a husband among his people, to profane himself.” “

And the High koen among his brothers, upon whose head the anointing oil is poured and whose hand is filled to wear the garments, and so on.

And he shall not come upon any dead person. For his father and for his mother he shall not become impure.”

And it is stated in the section concerning the impurity of the nazir: “

All the days that he separates himself to the Lord, he shall not come upon a dead person. For his father and for his mother, for his brother and for his sister, he shall not become impure to them when they die, because the crown of his God is upon his head.”

It is stated concerning a High koen: “

He shall not come upon any dead person”—

What does the verse speak of?

If

it is

concerning distant relatives

that it speaks, and the Torah warns the High koen not to become impure to them—

this cannot be said.

For

it is a kal va-chomer

that he does not become impure to them, and the Torah would not have needed to warn him concerning impurity from distant dead persons.

For

just as an ordinary koen, who becomes impure to relatives,

nevertheless

does not become impure to distant relatives,

a High koen, who does not become impure to relatives, surely should not become impure to distant relatives!?

Rather,

it is necessarily that

concerning relatives the verse “

he shall not come upon any dead person”

speaks.

And since the Torah already warned concerning relatives in the verse “he shall not come upon any dead person,” the Torah no longer needed to add and say, “For his father and for his mother he shall not become impure,” for the Torah had already warned him concerning relatives —

And

therefore the verse said: “And for his father he shall not become impure,” in order to teach: specifically

for his father he does not become impure.

But he does become impure to a met mitzva.