Yoma 26b (כו:) — the Talmud in English

And if you find a tanna

who taught

five

who maintains that there were five lotteries every day,

that

tanna

is not in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov and not in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

but he maintains that there was also a lottery for the shovel and a lottery for bringing the limbs from the ramp to the altar.

Mishna:

The

daily offering was brought

sometimes by

nine

kohanim. Sometimes by

ten.

Sometimes

by eleven.

Sometimes

by twelve.

It was

never fewer

than nine

and never more

than twelve.

How so?

The offering

itself

was brought every day in the morning

by nine

kohanim, as detailed above in the Mishna [25a], beginning with the carrying of the limbs to the ramp and thereafter.

During the festival

of Sukkot, one additional kohein was added, who brought to the altar

in one hand a flask of water

in order to pour it as a libation on the altar during the offering of the morning Tamid.

That makes ten

kohanim.

In the afternoon,

on every day, the Tamid was brought

by eleven

kohanim.

It itself, by nine,

as with the morning Tamid,

and two

additional kohanim brought

in their hands two logs of wood

to add to the wood of the arrangement.

For this is the mitzva: to add two logs of wood both to the morning Tamid and to the afternoon Tamid. However, whereas for the morning Tamid one kohein sufficed to place them on the arrangement, for the afternoon Tamid two kohanim were required for this. The Gemara derives this from a verse.

On Shabbat,

the morning Tamid was also brought

by eleven

kohanim.

It

itself, by nine,

as on a weekday.

And two

additional kohanim, who

held two bowls of

spoons of

frankincense for the showbread,

to burn them upon the altar.

And on the Shabbat within the festival

of Sukkot, one additional kohein was added, who carried

in one hand a flask of water

for the libation.

That makes twelve kohanim.

Gemara:

Rabbi Abba said—and some say it was Rami bar Hama, and some say Rabbi Yohanan:

The water libation during the festival

of Sukkot

is performed only with the morning Tamid.

From where

do we learn this?

As the Mishna teaches,

the Mishna states:

“And on the Shabbat within the festival, in one hand a flask of water,”

and thereby the count of twelve kohanim is completed.

This implies that it is specifically on Shabbat. But on the weekdays within the festival, it would not be possible for the number of kohanim to reach twelve.

And if it would enter your mind

that

with the afternoon Tamid

also

the water is poured,

then

on a weekday

of the festival of Sukkot

you would also find it

possible to have twelve with the afternoon Tamid, since every day it was brought by eleven, and on this day one additional kohein was added for the water libation.

Rather, it is certainly the case that the water libation was not performed with the afternoon Tamid.

Rav Ashi said: We too have learned this,

in a Mishna in tractate Sukkah:

“And

to the kohein who

pours

the water

one says to him: Raise your hand!”

so that we can see that he is pouring the water into the bowl designated for it at the top of the altar, and they will not suspect him of being a Sadducee.

For once he poured

the water

onto his feet,

as he was one of the Sadducees, who do not acknowledge the mitzva of the water libation,

and all the people pelted him with their etrogim.

Why did the Mishna need to inform us that they pelted him with etrogim? It was only in order to teach us that the water libation is performed only at the time of taking the lulav—that is, with the morning Tamid.

And we conclude:

This proves it.

It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai says: From where is it derived that the afternoon Tamid requires two logs of wood brought by two kohanim?

As it is stated, “

And the sons of Aaron the kohein shall place fire upon the altar

and arrange wood

upon the fire”—that is, arranging two logs of wood on the arrangement.

If it does not apply to the morning Tamid, for

it is already

written

there that two logs of wood are to be arranged:

“And the kohein shall burn wood upon it morning by morning, and he shall arrange upon it

the burnt offering,”

apply it to the afternoon Tamid.

From here we also learn that two kohanim are required to arrange the two logs of the afternoon Tamid, since it is written, “and they shall arrange,” in the plural.

And we ask:

But say that both

verses refer

to the morning Tamid, and the Merciful One said: Perform it, and then perform it again,

meaning that two arrangements of two logs must be made consecutively?

And we answer:

If so, let the verse say, “and he shall burn” and “and he shall burn,”

so that both verses would have used the same wording.

Rather, certainly the two verses do not concern the same matter. One verse refers to the morning Tamid, and the other to the afternoon Tamid.

We still ask: The two verses may in fact refer to the morning Tamid. The wording was changed because

if the Merciful One had written

also in the second verse

“and he shall burn,”

I would have said: One, yes,

so.

Two, no.

That is, one kohein alone would perform both arrangements.

It teaches us

by changing the wording of the verse and writing “and they shall arrange” the second time—instead:

Let one perform it,

meaning that one kohein alone performs the first arrangement,

and let two perform it,

meaning that two kohanim perform the second arrangement!?

And we answer:

If so, let the verse say,

in one verse,

“and he shall burn,”

and in the second verse

“and they shall burn,”

in the plural.

Alternatively,

let it write in one verse

“and he shall arrange,”

and in the second verse

“and they shall arrange,”

using that same wording.

What is the meaning of “and he shall burn” and “and they shall arrange”?

Why did the verse change its wording?

Rather,

this proves what we said:

the second verse refers to an entirely different matter—the afternoon Tamid—and therefore its wording was changed.

Rabbi Hiyya taught:

The

lottery

that they conducted for the services of the Tamid:

Sometimes

it was won by

thirteen

kohanim, as stated in the previous Mishna [25a], concerning the second lottery held every day.

Sometimes

it was won by

fourteen

kohanim, on the festival of Sukkot, when one additional kohein was added to pour the water, as stated in our Mishna.

Sometimes

it was won by

fifteen

kohanim, on Shabbat, when two kohanim were added for the bowls of frankincense of the showbread.

Sometimes

it was won by

sixteen

kohanim, on the Shabbat within the festival, when one kohein was added for the water libation and two kohanim for the bowls of frankincense of the showbread.

And we ask:

But wasn’t it taught

that sometimes it was won by

seventeen

kohanim?

And we answer:

That

baraita

is not in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov,

who said that there was no separate lottery for bringing the limbs from the ramp to the altar.

Rather, it is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

who maintains that there was no lottery for the shovel, and consequently must maintain that there was a lottery for bringing the limbs from the ramp to the altar [so that there would not be fewer than the four lotteries held every day]. This accords with our Mishna [above, 26a], which says that this was the fourth lottery.

According to him, every day fourteen kohanim won tasks in the service of the Tamid, since one additional kohein was added for bringing the limbs from the ramp to the altar.

Accordingly, on the Shabbat within the festival, seventeen kohanim won tasks.

The baraita of Rabbi Hiyya, however, follows Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, who says that the kohein who won the task of bringing a limb to the ramp then brought it to the altar. Therefore, it counted only thirteen every day, and the maximum possible number was sixteen kohanim.

Mishna:

The preceding Mishna discusses the daily offering, which was brought only from sheep in their first year.

But

a ram,

which is two years old, if it was an olah offering,

was brought by eleven

kohanim.

How so?

The flesh,

that is, the various limbs,

by five

kohanim, as with a sheep: [1. The head and the leg. 2. The two forelegs. 3. The tail and the leg. 4. The breast and the windpipe. 5. The two flanks].

The innards,

which are heavier in a ram than in a sheep,

and the fine flour and the wine

of the accompanying meal offering, which were also greater in a ram than in a sheep—the fine flour for a sheep being one-tenth of an eifa, and for a ram two-tenths; and the wine for a sheep being a quarter of a hin, and for a ram a third of a hin—

by two each.

Two kohanim brought each of these to the altar. That makes six kohanim, and together eleven kohanim.

A bull

as an olah

was brought by twenty-four

kohanim, because its limbs were exceedingly heavy. The fine flour and wine were also greater in quantity than those of a ram.

How so?

The head and the leg

required three kohanim:

one for the head and two for the leg.

The tail and the leg

required four:

two for the tail and two for the leg.

The breast and the windpipe

required four:

one for the breast and three for the windpipe.

The two forelegs—

by two.

And the two flanks—

by two.

The innards, the fine flour, and the wine—

by three each,

kohanim, each item.

In what circumstances does this statement apply,

that so many kohanim were required for each animal and that their tasks were assigned by lottery?

With regard to communal offerings,

such as the sheep of the daily offering and the bulls and rams of the additional offering.

But with regard to an individual offering—

if one wishes,

one kohein

to offer

the entire animal without a lottery,

he may offer it.

The flaying and cutting up of both types,

of communal offerings and individual offerings,

are equal

in that they are valid when performed by a non-kohein.

Gemara:

The tanna

taught in a baraita:

The flaying and cutting up

of communal offerings and individual offerings

are equal

in that they are valid

when performed by a non-kohein.

Hizkiya said: From where is it derived that the flaying and cutting up are equal?

As it is stated, “

And he shall flay the burnt offering and cut it into its pieces.

And the sons of Aaron the kohein shall place fire upon the altar.”

We infer from the fact that “the sons of Aaron the kohein” are mentioned only with regard to placing the fire that only

placing fire requires priesthood,

but

the flaying and cutting up,

which are written beforehand,

do not require priesthood,

but are valid even when performed by a non-kohein.