Yoma 25a — the Talmud in English

What, is it not referring to those

kohanim

who were assigned by the payis,

who strip them of the weekday garments that they wore at the time of the payis, and dress them in sacred garments in order to perform the service.

It follows that they conduct the payis while wearing weekday garments.

And we reject this:

Rav Huna bar Yehuda said that Rav Sheshet said: No!

Rather,

[it refers to] those who were not assigned by the payis,

for they would strip from them the sacred garments that they wore at the time of the payis and dress them in weekday garments.

This too is reasonable: for if it enters your mind that it refers to those who were assigned by the payis,

then this would be difficult: that which it teaches:

They would leave upon them only trousers,

whose meaning, according to this, is that they leave the weekday trousers upon them, and dress the sacred garments upon them, and only afterward would they exchange the weekday trousers for sacred trousers.

And it was taught in a beraita: From where [do we know] that nothing should precede the trousers? The verse says: “And linen trousers shall be upon his flesh”!

And necessarily, the intention of the Mishna is that they leave the sacred trousers upon the kohanim who were not assigned by the payis until they put on the rest of the weekday garments.

But the other [interpretation],

Rav Naḥman said:

That is not difficult:

for

this is what it teaches:

While the weekday garments are still upon them,

which they wore at the time of the payis,

they dress them in sacred trousers

beneath the weekday garments, so that they would not stand naked when they stripped off the weekday garments. And only afterward

would they strip from them

the

garments

of

the weekday [garments], and they would leave

upon them

only trousers

of sacred [garments]

alone,

and continue to dress them in the rest of the sacred garments.

And it follows that indeed the trousers preceded all the priestly garments.

Rav Sheshet said: From where do I say it

that they conduct the payis while wearing sacred garments?

As it was taught in a beraita: The Chamber of Hewn Stone was like a basilica

a high building

it was.

And they would conduct there the

payis in its east

of that chamber, for there the kohanim would stand for the payis.

And an elder

one of the sages of the Sanhedrin

would sit in its west

in order to instruct them in the order of the payis procedures.

And the kohanim would be encircled and standing

around in a circle

like a kolyar,

a round ornament.

And the appointed one

over the payis procedures

would come and remove the turban from the head of one of them, and they would know that from him

the

payis begins.

From him the counting begins.

And if it enters your mind

that they conduct the payis

in weekday garments,

this would be difficult:

And is it the case that

a turban in weekday garments—

is there such a thing?

And we reject this:

Yes!

It is possible that a kohen would have a turban made of weekday garments.

As Rav Yehuda taught, and some say Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda: A kohen for whom his mother made a tunic

like the tunic of the priestly garments—

he performs with it an individual service.

For example, removing the spoon and the censer from the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur, which is not needed by the public, but is incumbent upon the kohen to clear the place.

It follows that the mothers of kohanim were accustomed to make for their sons, from their own materials, something resembling priestly garments, in order to display the splendor of their wealth and the beauty of the work of their hands, and how much they beautify the mitzvot.

If so, it is possible that kohanim would wear a weekday turban.

Abaye said: Learn from it

from this beraita:

The Chamber of Hewn Stone

was

half in the sacred area,

half of it was sanctified with the sanctity of the Temple courtyard,

and half in the non-sacred area

which was not sanctified with the sanctity of the Temple courtyard.

And learn from it: It had two entrances

for the Chamber of Hewn Stone,

one opening into the sacred area, and one opening into the non-sacred area.

One of the entrances opened toward the sacred place, with the sanctity of the Temple courtyard. And the other opened toward a non-sacred place.

The proof that half of it was in the sacred area and half in the non-sacred area:

For if it enters your mind that it was entirely in the sacred area,

this would be difficult: how was

the elder sitting in its west?

But the Master said: There is no sitting in the Temple courtyard,

it is forbidden to sit in the Temple courtyard, because it is stated: “To stand in attendance,” “those who stand there before the Lord,”

except

only

for the kings of the House of David alone,

for we find sitting with regard to them, as it is stated: “And King David came and sat before the Lord.”

And if it enters your mind that it was entirely in the non-sacred area,

this would be difficult: how was the

payis in its east? But we require

that the payis be in the sacred area, as it is written:

“In the House of God we shall walk with tumult”.

And earlier we expounded from it with regard to the payis procedures. It follows that the payis must be in the House of God.

Rather, learn from it: Half of it was in the sacred area,

and there they conducted the payis.

And half of it was in the non-sacred area,

and there the elder sat.

And the proof that it had two entrances:

For

if it enters your mind that it had one entrance

alone

it had,

in either case:

If this entrance

opened into the sacred area,

it would still be difficult: how was

the elder sitting in its west?

For although that place was non-sacred, nevertheless its law was like that of the sacred area because of its entrance, and sitting there was forbidden.

And we learned in the Mishna: Chambers built in the non-sacred area and opening into the sacred area— their interior is sacred?

And if it enters your mind

that that entrance was

open into the non-sacred area,

it would still be difficult: how was the

payis in its east?

And we learned in the Mishna: The chambers

built in the

sacred area and opening into the non-sacred area—their interior is non-sacred,

and if so, “In the House of God” was not fulfilled.

Rather, is it not that one may learn from it: It had two entrances, one opening into the sacred area and one opening into the non-sacred area,

and in such a manner the law is that what is built in the sacred area is sacred, and what is built in the non-sacred area is non-sacred.

Mishna:

The second payis

of the four payis procedures that were conducted each day was made in order to determine:

a.

Who slaughters

the daily offering.

b.

Who sprinkles

its blood.

c.

Who removes the ash.

He removes the ash from

the inner altar.

d.

And who removes the ash from the menorah.

He removes the wicks and the remnants of the oil from the menorah.

And who brings up limbs

of the daily offering

to the ramp.

And several kohanim were assigned to bring up the limbs, according to the following order:

e.

The head and the leg

the right hind leg.

f.

And the two hands

the front legs.

g.

The tail

the tail

and the leg

the left hind leg.

h.

And the breast

the breast fat that is opposite the ground.

And the windpipe

the place where it raises the cud, namely the neck, to which the windpipe, lung, liver, and heart are attached.

i.

And the two flanks.

j.

And the innards.

k.

And the fine flour.

A tenth of an ephah of fine flour for the meal-offering of the daily offering.

l.

And the griddle-cakes.

The griddle-cake meal-offering that the High Priest offered every day, a tenth of an ephah of fine flour, half in the morning and half in the evening [and it is called “griddle-cakes” because it was made in a griddle].

m.

And the wine

for the libations of the daily offering.

It follows that

thirteen kohanim were assigned to it

in the second payis.

Ben Azzai said before Rabbi Akiva in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua:

Just as

the manner of its walking

of the ramp while alive, so

was the daily offering brought

the daily offering.

And he disputes the first tanna concerning the order of the offering. And in the Gemara it will be explained.

Gemara:

They raised a dilemma before them: When they conduct the payis—

do they

conduct a payis for one service

only,

conduct a payis,

namely, for the first service, who slaughters. And for the remaining services they do not conduct a separate payis, but the kohanim standing to the right of the kohen who was assigned to slaughter are assigned to the remaining services according to the order?

Or perhaps they conducted a payis for each and every service,

they vote again?

Come and hear

from this, for we learned at the beginning of our chapter:

There were four payis procedures there.

And if it enters your mind

that

they conduct a payis for each service

separately, if so,

there would be many.

There would be more than four payis procedures each day, for in the payis of our Mishna alone there were thirteen payis procedures?

Rather, certainly all the services were included in one payis.

And we reject this:

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: This is what it means:

They enter four times

they assemble each day

to conduct a payis

to vote,

and for each one and one

at each assembly

there were many payis procedures.