Nazir 47b (מז:) — the Talmud in English

Whereas a High Priest who became High Priest by virtue of being “one with many garments” brings a female sheep or female goat as a sin-offering for his inadvertent transgression, like any person who sinned inadvertently. And it is likewise obvious that a High Priest

anointed with the anointing oil!

and

a High Priest

with many garments,

who were traveling on the road, and encountered an unattended corpse:

The High Priest

anointed with the anointing oil is preferable

and should not become impure; rather, the one with many garments should become impure. This is because:

For if

the High Priest

anointed with the anointing oil brings “

the bull brought for all the mitzvot”

when he issued himself a ruling concerning any of the mitzvot for which an inadvertent transgression requires a sin-offering, and acted in accordance with his ruling.

Whereas

a High Priest

with many garments does not bring

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

And it is likewise obvious: A High Priest

who had served as High Priest

and was removed from the High Priesthood,

and one with many garments

who is serving as High Priest, who were traveling on the road and encountered an unattended corpse:

The

High Priest with many garments is preferable,

and the “former anointed priest” should become impure.

For

a High Priest

with many garments performs the service

[he performs the Temple service as a High Priest].

Whereas

a High Priest

who had served previously is not fit for service

at all.

And it is likewise obvious: A High Priest who

was removed

from his priesthood

because of

the impurity of

his seminal emission, and

a High Priest who

was removed because of a blemish,

who were traveling on the road and encountered an unattended corpse:

A High Priest who

was removed because of his seminal emission is preferable,

and the one removed because of his blemish should become impure, even if that blemish was temporary.

For this one—

the one removed because of his seminal emission—

is fit for service tomorrow,

once he becomes pure from his seminal emission.

Whereas one removed because of a blemish is not fit for service

until his blemish heals. All the laws enumerated up to this point are straightforward.

However,

they raised a dilemma,

the members of the academy were uncertain:

A High Priest

anointed for war

and the deputy

of the High Priest who were traveling on the road and encountered an unattended corpse:

which of them is preferable

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

And the Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma:

Is the High Priest

anointed for war preferable,

and should not become impure, because

he is fit for war,

as, since he was appointed for the needs of the war, the multitudes depend upon him—

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

as he was appointed to perform the service of the High Priest on Yom Kippur if a disqualification should occur to the High Priest?

This is unlike the priest anointed for war, who was not appointed for service at all.

Come and hear

from this

as it was taught

explicitly, that the deputy is preferable:

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

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

except

for this leniency, which applies to the priest anointed for war more than to the deputy:

If they were traveling on the road and encountered an unattended corpse, the priest anointed for war shall become impure, but the deputy shall not become impure!

And we challenge this:

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

in saving his life.

If a wall fell upon both of them, one must clear the rubble first for the priest anointed for war. If so, we should say that with regard to impurity from an unattended corpse as well, the priest anointed for war is preferable, and the deputy should become impure!?

He said

in explanation

Mar Zutra:

With regard to

saving

his life,

indeed

the priest anointed for war is preferable.

What is the reason?

Because

the multitudes depend upon him

[the multitudes depend upon him in war]—

but

with regard to

impurity, the deputy is preferable,

since he was appointed for service.

As it was taught: Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: Why did they institute a deputy for the High Priest?

So that if it should occur to him

—to the High Priest—

a disqualification, then

the deputy

enters and serves in his place.

And here the Gemara returns to discuss the fundamental permission for a nazirite and a High Priest to become impure for an unattended corpse:

They disagree only

in our Mishna, the Sages and Rabbi Eliezer,

about a High Priest and a nazirite when they go together

[when they go together: who takes precedence over whom in becoming impure for an unattended corpse]—

but

when a nazirite and a High Priest go

each separately

[each one alone],

they are fit to become impure

[each of them becomes impure for an unattended corpse].

And

from where are these matters derived

that they are permitted to become impure for an unattended corpse?

And the Gemara explains that it is derived from that which

the Sages taught:

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

The Lord said to Moses: Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them: None shall defile himself for a dead person among his people, except for his close relative who is near to him: for his mother, for his father, for his son, for his daughter, or for his brother; and for his virgin sister who is near to him, who has not been married, for her he may become impure. He shall not defile himself, being a husband among his people, to profane himself.” “

And the High Priest among his brothers, upon whose head the anointing oil has been poured and whose hand has been filled to wear the garments, and so on.” “

He shall not enter where there is any dead body. He shall not defile himself for his father or his mother.”

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

Throughout all the days that he consecrates himself to the Lord, he shall not approach a dead person. For his father or his mother, for his brother or his sister, he shall not defile himself for them when they die, for the crown of his God is upon his head.”

It is stated concerning the High Priest: “

He shall not enter where there is any dead body”—

What does the verse speak of?

If

it is stated that it

speaks of distant relatives,

and the Torah warns the High Priest not to become impure for them—

this cannot be said.

For

it is a kal va-chomer

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

Tosafot wrote later in the sugya that this kal va-chomer is stated merely for completeness, since even without it, it is obvious that a High Priest does not leave the sanctity of an ordinary priest and does not become impure for distant relatives. For

if an ordinary priest, who does become impure for close relatives,

nevertheless

does not become impure for distant relatives,

then with regard to a High Priest, who does not become impure for close relatives, is it not certainly the case that he does not become impure for distant relatives!?

Rather,

it must be that

the verse speaks of close relatives: “

He shall not enter where there is any dead body,”

speaks of them.

Since the Torah has already warned concerning close relatives in the verse “He shall not enter where there is any dead body,” it would no longer have needed to add: “He shall not defile himself for his father or his mother,” since the Torah has already warned him concerning close relatives —

And

therefore the verse says: “And he shall not defile himself for his father,” in order to teach: specifically,

for his father he may not become impure.

But he may become impure for an unattended corpse.