Yoma 12b (יב:) — the Talmud in English

And Rav Pappa said:

there is no need to provide training through the multiplication of garments, rather,

his service

of the koen on Yom Kippur, since it is fit to be performed only by a High Priest, itself contains a distinctive indication and expression of the status of High Priest, and this service by itself is sufficient to

train him

to become a High Priest, even without the multiplication of garments.

And there is a basis for this reasoning in the laws governing the training of the Temple vessels, for they too require consecration in order to become service vessels, rendering them fit for service.

Is it not taught

in a beraita:

All the vessels that Moses made

in his generation, at the time the Tabernacle was erected,

their anointing

with the anointing oil, during the eight days of the inauguration,

consecrated them.

As it is stated: “And he anointed them and sanctified them.”

But the vessels that were made

from that point onward

were not anointed with the anointing oil. For we expound the word “them” as referring to anointing those vessels, but not to anointing vessels for future generations.

Rather, the beginning of

their service

as service vessels

trains them.

Since this service must be performed with sacred vessels, the service performed with the vessel is itself considered training for sanctity.

And here too,

since the service on Yom Kippur must be performed only by a High Priest,

his service

of the koen who performs the service

trains him

to become a High Priest through it.

When Rav Dimi came

from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia,

he said:

Concerning

the belt of an ordinary koen,

Rabbi and

Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon,

disagreed about what it was made of.

One said: It was of mixed kinds

and was made of wool and linen.

And one said: It was of linen

[linen], and contained no mixture of wool.

And we say:

It can be established

[it can be demonstrated]

that Rabbi is the one who said

that the belt was

of mixed kinds.

From

that which is taught:

There is no difference between the garments of a

High Priest and

the garments of an

ordinary koen, except for the belt,

in which there was a difference between them,

the words of Rabbi.

Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says:

There is no difference between them at all,

not even

with regard to the

belt.

And the Gemara analyzes this statement:

When

did Rabbi and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, disagree in this beraita?

If you say

that they stated their opinions with regard to the garments worn

during the rest of the year,

but surely

there is much

[a great deal of difference in the garments]

between

a High Priest and an ordinary koen.

For the

koen

who is

High Priest serves in eight

garments [the breastplate, ephod, robe, and frontplate, in addition to the tunic, trousers, turban, and belt],

whereas

the

ordinary koen

serves

in four

garments בלבד.

Rather, is it not

necessarily the case that they disagreed

with regard to

the priestly garments used for the service of

Yom Kippur,

when even the High Priest serves only in four white garments, and his belt on Yom Kippur is not of mixed kinds?

If so, Rabbi, who says that on Yom Kippur the High Priest and the ordinary koen differ with regard to the type of belt, holds that the belt of the ordinary koen was of mixed kinds [whereas the belt of the High Priest was made only of linen, as is explicitly stated in the verse].

And we reject this:

They said: No,

you cannot prove from here that this was Rabbi’s opinion.

For

in fact

we must interpret their statement as referring to their disagreement

concerning

the priestly garments of

the rest of the year,

and they were not dealing at all with the additional garments of the High Priest; rather, they disagreed concerning

those

garments

that are equal

for both of them, namely, the four white garments.

With regard to these garments, Rabbi holds that they differ concerning the belt: The belt of the High Priest during the rest of the year is of mixed kinds, whereas the belt of the ordinary koen is made only of linen.

And Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, holds that both of them serve with a belt of mixed kinds.

When Ravin came, he said: The belt of the High Priest on Yom Kippur —

according to everyone

it

is of “linen,”

linen alone, as this is explicitly stated in the Torah: “And he shall gird himself with a linen belt.”

And likewise, the belt of the High Priest

during the rest of the year —

according to everyone

it

is of mixed kinds,

as this too is explicitly stated concerning it: “And you shall make the belt of twined linen and blue wool,” and blue wool is wool.

They disagreed

only with regard to the belt of the ordinary koen, both

concerning

the belt of

the rest of the year and concerning

that of

Yom Kippur [there is no difference between the days].

there being no difference between the two days.

For Rabbi says

that it

is of mixed kinds, whereas Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says

that it

is of linen.

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: We too have learned

in accordance with Ravin’s statement: Rabbi is the one who holds that the belt of the ordinary koen was of mixed kinds, and not like the belt of the High Priest on Yom Kippur.

For so we learned in a beraita: In the passage concerning the removal of the ashes, the Torah states: “And the koen shall put on his linen tunic [which is the tunic] and linen trousers shall he put on

upon his flesh.”

What does the verse teach by stating “shall he put on,”

when it has already stated at the beginning of the verse, “And the koen shall put on”?

Rather,

to include

additional garments not mentioned in this passage, namely,

the turban and the belt,

which he too must wear

for the removal of the ashes,

as this is a complete service and requires the four priestly garments, like the other services,

the words of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Dosa says:

It states “shall he put on” here, and in the passage concerning the service of Yom Kippur it states: “He shall put on the sacred linen tunic.” And we derive it by means of a gzera shava:

to include

the

garments

of the

koen

High Priest,

which he wore

on Yom Kippur, which are fit

for an ordinary koen to perform service in them after Yom Kippur. This is unlike the one who holds [below] that the garments of the High Priest on Yom Kippur are stored away and may never again be used for service.

Rabbi says:

The verse should not be expounded as Rabbi Dosa does, since

two refutations

[objections]

apply to this.

First,

an ordinary koen cannot use the white garments in which the High Priest served on Yom Kippur, because

the belt of the High Priest

in which he serves

on Yom Kippur is not the belt of the ordinary koen.

For the belt of the High Priest on Yom Kippur is of linen, whereas the belt of the ordinary koen is of mixed kinds.

And furthermore,

there is a logical reason not to validate the garments of the High Priest used in the service of Yom Kippur for the service of an ordinary koen throughout the rest of the year:

Would you say that the

garments that you used

for the service of Yom Kippur, which is

a higher degree of sanctity,

since you entered with them to perform the service in the innermost place,

you should use them

for the service of the entire rest of the year, which is

a lower degree of sanctity

than it!?

Rather, what does the verse teach by stating “shall he put on”?

To include worn garments.

You should not say that the garments must be new and may not already have been used for an extended period.

And Rabbi Dosa follows his reasoning

in another beraita.

As it is taught:

It is stated in the passage concerning the service of Yom Kippur: “And he shall remove the linen garments that he wore when he entered the Sanctuary,

and he shall leave them there.”

The first tanna holds:

This teaches that

these garments

require being stored away.

Rabbi Dosa says: This “leaving” does not mean that they are no longer fit for any service. Rather,

he may not use them

the High Priest for service on

another Yom Kippur,

the following year.

The Sages taught:

If

there occurred to him

the High Priest

a disqualification

of ritual impurity,

and they appointed

another koen

in his place

to serve on Yom Kippur, and afterward the first became pure and was fit to serve, then the

first returns to his service

as High Priest, as he was before he was displaced because of his disqualification.

And the

second

[the one who served in his place] also remains invested with the sanctity of the High Priest, and

all the mitzvot of the High Priest apply to him.

Thus, he is forbidden to let his hair grow long and to rend his garments, as is the law of a High Priest; he may not become impure for relatives, is forbidden to marry a widow, and serves in eight garments,

the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yosei says: The first returns to his service.

But the

second

is fit neither to

serve in eight garments as a

High Priest, nor to

serve in four garments as an

ordinary koen.

And

further,

Rabbi Yosei said: There was an incident involving Yosef ben Elam in Sepphoris, in which a disqualification occurred to the High Priest, and they appointed him

Yosef ben Elam to serve

in his place.

And

after the first had regained his fitness,

the Sages said: The first —

returns to his service.

Whereas Yosef ben Elam, who was the

second —

is fit neither to

serve as a

High Priest, nor to

serve as an

ordinary koen.

And they explained the reason that he is not fit to serve as a

High Priest: because

they are concerned lest

enmity

develop between the two of them.

And the reason that he is not fit to serve as an

ordinary koen

is

because of the principle, “One elevates in sanctity but does not lower,”

for since the second has already been elevated in sanctity to become a High Priest, he is not lowered from his sanctity to become an ordinary koen.