Yoma 26b — the Talmud in English

And if you find a tanna

if he finds a tanna

who teaches five ![](pamud.bmp "

exact location of the page") who holds that there were five payisot every day,

that

tanna

is not in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov and not in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda, but rather he holds that there was also a payis for the machtah and also one for raising the limbs from the ramp to the altar.

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 offering of the

daily offering was brought

sometimes

by nine

kohanim. Sometimes

by ten.

Sometimes

by eleven.

Sometimes

by twelve.

Always

no fewer

than nine

and no more

than twelve.

How?

It

itself

was brought every day in the morning

by nine

kohanim, as specified above in the Mishna [25a], from carrying the limbs to the ramp onward.

On the Festival

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

in his hand one flask of water

in order to pour it on the altar at the time of bringing the morning tamid.

There are here ten

kohanim.

In the afternoon

of every day, the tamid was brought

by eleven

kohanim.

It itself was by nine

as with the morning tamid,

and two

additional ones who brought up

in their hands two pieces of wood

to add to the wood of the arrangement.

For this is the mitzva: to add two pieces of wood both with the morning tamid and with the afternoon tamid. However, whereas with the morning tamid one kohen who brings them onto the arrangement is sufficient, with the afternoon tamid two kohanim are required for this. And the Gemara derives this from a verse.

On Shabbat

the morning tamid was likewise brought

by eleven

kohanim.

It

itself was by nine

as on an ordinary weekday.

And two

additional ones who

held in their hands two bowls

[spoons]

of frankincense of the showbread,

to burn them on the altar.

And on the Shabbat that falls within the Festival

of Sukkot, one additional kohen was added, who carried

in his hand one flask of water

for the pouring.

There are here twelve kohanim.

Gemara:

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

Water is poured on the Festival

of Sukkot

only with the morning tamid.

From where

did we learn this?

From that it teaches

the Mishna:

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

and with this the count of twelve kohanim is completed.

And it implies that specifically on Shabbat. But on the weekdays within the Festival, it is impossible for the number of kohanim to reach twelve.

And if it enters your mind

that

with the afternoon tamid

also

they pour

water, then

on a weekday

of the Festival of Sukkot

you would also find it

twelve with the afternoon tamid, for every day it was brought by eleven, and on this day one additional kohen was added for the pouring of the water.

Rather, certainly the pouring of the water was not with the afternoon tamid.

Rav Ashi said: We too have learned it

thus in the Mishna in tractate Sukkah:

“And

to the kohen who

pours

the water

one says to him: Raise your hand!”

so that we will see that you are placing the water into the cup designated for this at the top of the altar, and they will not suspect you of being a Sadducee.

For once he poured

the kohen poured the water

onto his feet,

for he was of the sect of the Sadducees, who do not acknowledge the mitzva of pouring the water,

and all the people pelted him with their etrogim.

And why did the Mishna need to inform us that they pelted him with etrogim, if not in order to teach us that the pouring of the water is only at the time of taking the lulav, that is, with the morning tamid?

And we conclude:

Conclude from it.

It was taught: Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai says: From where is it established that the afternoon tamid requires two pieces of wood by two kohanim?

As it is stated: “

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

and they shall arrange wood on the fire,”

that is, arranging two pieces of wood on the arrangement.

If it does not refer to the morning tamid, for

already

it is written

in its regard, the arranging of two pieces of wood:

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

the burnt offering” —

apply it to the afternoon tamid.

And from here we have also learned that two kohanim must arrange the two pieces of wood of the afternoon, for it is written, “and they shall arrange,” in the plural.

And we ask:

And say: both this and that

the two verses speak

of the morning tamid, and the Merciful One said: Do it, and then do it again

that is, two pieces of wood must be arranged twice, one after the other?

And we answer:

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

for in the two verses it should have been written in identical language.

Rather, certainly the two do not speak of one matter. Rather, one verse speaks of the morning tamid, and the other of the afternoon tamid.

And we still ask: Actually, both verses speak of the morning tamid. And it changed its wording 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 kohen alone would perform both arrangements.

It teaches us

by the fact that the verse changed its wording and wrote the second time, “and they shall arrange,” in the plural —

that one should do it

that the first arrangement should be performed by one kohen alone,

and two should do it

that the second arrangement should be performed by two kohanim!?

And we answer:

If so, let the verse say

in one verse

“and he shall burn,”

in the singular, 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,”

which is the same wording.

What is “and he shall burn,” “and they shall arrange,”

that the verse changed its wording?

Rather,

conclude from it as we said

that the second verse speaks of an entirely different matter, of the afternoon tamid, and therefore it changed its wording.

Rabbi Hiyya taught:

the

lot

that they conducted for the service of the tamid.

Sometimes —

they merited it

thirteen

kohanim, as stated in the preceding Mishna [25a], concerning the second payis every day.

Sometimes —

they merited it

fourteen

kohanim. On the Festival of Sukkot, when one additional kohen was added who poured the water, as stated in our Mishna.

Sometimes —

they merited it

fifteen

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

Sometimes —

they merited it

sixteen

kohanim. On the Shabbat within the Festival, when one kohen was added for pouring the water, and two kohanim for the bowls of the showbread.

And we ask:

But it was taught:

sometimes they merited it

seventeen

kohanim?

And we answer:

That

beraita

is not in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov,

who said that there was no separate payis for raising the limbs from the ramp to the altar.

Rather, it is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

who holds that there was no payis for the machtah, and consequently he must hold that there was a payis for raising the limbs from the ramp to the altar [so that there would not be fewer than the four payisot every day]. And this is in accordance with the opinion of our Mishna [above, 26a], that this was the fourth payis.

And according to him, every day fourteen kohanim merited the service of the tamid, since one additional kohen was added for raising the limbs from the ramp to the altar.

And if so, on the Shabbat within the Festival, seventeen kohanim merited it.

But Rabbi Hiyya’s beraita holds in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, that the kohen who merited raising the limb to the ramp subsequently raises it to the altar. Therefore it counted only thirteen every day. And at most sixteen kohanim are possible.

Mishna:

The preceding Mishna speaks of the tamid offering, which comes only from sheep in their first year.

But

a ram,

which is two years old, if it is a burnt offering, was

brought by eleven

kohanim.

How?

The flesh,

that is, the various limbs,

by five

kohanim, as with a sheep [a. the head and the leg; b. the two forelegs; c. the tail and the leg; d. the breast and the neck; e. the two flanks].

The innards,

which are heavier in a ram than in a sheep,

and the fine flour and the wine

of the meal offering that comes with the offering, which too were greater in a ram than in a sheep—the fine flour for a sheep being one-tenth and for a ram two-tenths, and the wine for a sheep one-quarter of a hin and for a ram one-third of a hin—

by two each.

Two kohanim brought each of them up to the altar. There are here six kohanim, and together eleven kohanim.

A bull

as a burnt offering

was brought by twenty-four

kohanim, because its limbs were exceedingly heavy. And the fine flour and wine were also greater in it than in a ram.

How?

The head and the leg

required three kohanim.

The head by one, and the leg by two.

The tail and the leg

required four.

The tail by two and the leg by two.

The breast and the neck

by four.

The breast by one and the neck by three.

The two forelegs —

by two.

And the two flanks —

by two.

The innards, the fine flour, and the wine —

by three each

kohanim, each.

In what matter are these words stated,

that so many kohanim were needed for each animal and their service was determined by a payis? —

With communal offerings,

such as sheep for the tamid offering and bulls and rams for the additional offering.

But with an individual offering —

if one wished,

one kohen

to offer

the entire animal and without a payis,

he offers it.

The flaying and dismembering of both these and those,

of communal offerings and individual offerings,

are equal

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

Gemara:

A tanna taught

in a beraita:

The flaying and dismembering

of communal offerings and individual offerings,

are equal

in that they are valid

when performed by a non-kohen.

Hezekiah said: From where is it established that flaying and dismembering 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 kohen shall place fire upon the altar.”

And we infer from this that “the sons of Aaron the kohen” are mentioned only with the placing of the fire, that only

the placing of fire requires priesthood,

but

flaying and dismembering,

which are written beforehand,

do not require priesthood,

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