Yoma 2b (ב:) — the Talmud in English

And we challenge this: Perhaps the derivation is through a gezerah shavah between the days of the inauguration and Yom Kippur בלבד.

And say: “He commanded”

concerning the days of the inauguration teaches through a gezerah shavah to

“He commanded”

concerning Yom Kippur, that the High Priest must withdraw, but we have no derivation establishing withdrawal for the red heifer.

As it is written

concerning Aaron the priest’s Yom Kippur service [Leviticus 16:34]:

“And he did as the Lord commanded Moses!?”

And we answer:

We derive

through a gezerah shavah

“He commanded

concerning the red heifer,

which

was said

before the performance

of the heifer,

from “He commanded

concerning the days of the inauguration,

which

was said

before

the

performance

of the inauguration.

But we do not derive “He commanded”

concerning Yom Kippur,

which

was said

after the performance

of Aaron the priest,

from “He commanded,” which

was said

before the performance

during the days of the inauguration.

And we challenge this:

And say

that we derive through a gezerah shavah

“He commanded” concerning the communal offerings,

of which it is

written

[Leviticus 7:38]:

“On the day that He commanded the children of Israel.”

And we would learn that every priest must withdraw for seven days before performing the service of communal offerings!?

And we answer:

We derive “He commanded” from “He commanded,”

but we do not derive “He commanded them” from “He commanded.”

And we challenge this:

What difference does it make

whether the wording in the two verses is not precisely identical? Surely it should suffice that the meanings of the words are equivalent.

For

be

hold,

the tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael

said: It is stated concerning the plague of houses [Leviticus 14:39]:

“And the priest shall return.”

This is said concerning a house that was quarantined for seven days because of a leprous mark, where, if the priest saw that the mark had spread, he was required to remove the stone bearing the mark, take down the plaster surrounding it, and replaster the wall of the house anew.

And afterward it is stated:

“And the priest shall come.”

This is said concerning a house in which the mark had not spread at the end of the first week, but which was quarantined for a second week; in that case, even if the mark had not spread at the end of the second week but remained as it was, its stones were removed and it was replastered.

And we learn through a gezerah shavah from “And the priest shall return,” which was said at the end of the first week concerning a house in which the mark had spread, that the stones must likewise be removed from this house, in which the mark had not spread after two weeks, and concerning which it is said: “And the priest shall come.”

For

“returning”

is “coming.”

That is, the similarity of the subject matter between the two verses is sufficient for deriving a gezerah shavah from it.

If so, we should likewise be able to derive through a gezerah shavah from “He commanded” to “He commanded them.”

And we answer:

That applies

when one may expound a gezerah shavah based even on similarity of subject matter—

where there is no

other gezerah shavah

that resembles it

in the same wording.

But where there is

a gezerah shavah

that resembles it

in the same wording,

from

the gezerah shavah

that resembles it

in the precise wording

we derive,

and not from a gezerah shavah based only on similarity of subject matter.

Now the Gemara explains what Rabbi Yohanan said:

“To atone”—

these are the rites of Yom Kippur.

We inquire about this:

And say

that the intention of the verse is

the atonement that

was stated concerning

offerings,

and that the priest performing these offerings would be required to withdraw for seven days?

And we answer:

Is it so?

That is,

would we know which priest would happen

to be chosen by lot to perform these offerings,

such that he should be required,

that we obligate him to

withdraw

beforehand?

They said: Why

should it be impossible to withdraw him?

Not

to withdraw him?

After all, this is possible if

we require withdrawal for the entire priestly watch of the paternal household,

with a specific day assigned to each of them, so that each of the priests would withdraw for the week preceding his day of service!?

And we answer:

We derive

Yom Kippur, which is

an event with a fixed time, from

the days of the inauguration, which are also

“an event with a fixed time”

[since they occurred only once, at a fixed time].

To exclude offerings, which are present every day,

and therefore they are not derived from “to atone,” which is stated concerning the days of the inauguration.

And furthermore, we inquire about this:

And say

that the offerings of

the Festivals,

which are an event with a fixed time, should be included in “to atone,” and the priests should be required to withdraw for seven days before the Festival!?

And we answer:

We derive

Yom Kippur, which is

an event observed

only

once a year,

from the days of the inauguration, which are

“an event observed

only

once a year.”

That is, they occurred only once.

To exclude the Festivals,

which are not once a year,

but occur three times a year.

And we challenge this:

And say

that

one Festival

among the three Festivals, which occurs once a year, should be derived from the days of the inauguration, and the priests should be required to withdraw for a week before it!?

And if you would say

in response:

We do not know which of them

that Festival would be, since we cannot determine which of them should preferentially be derived from the days of the inauguration:

You can say that one of the Festivals should be given preference:

Either

the

Festival of Matzot—

since the verse mentions it first

in the passages concerning the Festivals;

or

the

Festival of Sukkot—

since its mitzvot are more numerous

[sukka, lulav, willow, and the water libation]

Rather,

this is how one should answer:

We derive the withdrawal

of the High Priest, which is

seven

days,

for one day

[Yom Kippur]—

from the withdrawal for seven

days of the inauguration,

for one day

[the eighth day of the inauguration].

But we do not derive withdrawal for seven

days

for seven

days of the Festival—

from the withdrawal for seven

days of the inauguration

for one day

[the eighth day of the inauguration].

And we challenge this:

And say

that the

eighth

day, Shemini Atzeret, should be included—

for it has withdrawal for seven days for one day!?

And we answer:

We derive

Yom Kippur, which is

an event preceded by no sanctity,

from the inauguration, which is

an event preceded by no sanctity.

But we do not derive

Shemini Atzeret, which is

an event preceded by the sanctity

of the Festival

before it,

from the inauguration, which is

an event preceded by no sanctity.

And we challenge this:

A

fter all,

is this not a kal va-chomer!?

Now, if an event preceded by no sanctity—

requires withdrawal,

an event preceded by sanctity—

all the more so

that withdrawal should be required before it!?

Rav Mesharsheya said: No,

it is impossible to expound this through a kal va-chomer, because we have a scriptural decree: “

As he did on

this

day, the Lord commanded to do, to atone for you,”

it is written.

The verse required withdrawal only for a day that is

like this

one—that resembles it—and not for a day whose sanctity is more stringent than its own, but which does not resemble it.

Rav Ashi said:

This is how one should explain why we do not derive that withdrawal is required before Shemini Atzeret:

Is there such a thing

as this,

that the primary Festival,

the seven days of Sukkot,

does not require withdrawal

before it, whereas Shemini Atzeret, which is

secondary to it,

like the eighth day of Sukkot—

requires withdrawal!?

And even according to the one who says, “The eighth

day, Atzeret,

is a Festival in its own right,”

and is not secondary to Sukkot, it still cannot be derived that withdrawal is required before it, since it is not considered entirely an independent Festival.