Yoma 3b — the Talmud in English

And

as the verse says [Numbers 10:1]]

“Make for yourself

two silver trumpets,” its meaning is: make for yourself

from your own

—that Moses our teacher was to make them from his money.

And according to the one who says this, it is properly learned specifically that Yom Kippur is like the days of the inauguration, because only in both of them are the sacrifices taken from the private property of the priests.

But according to the one who says

that also the bull and the ram during the days of the inauguration were

from communal property—

what is there to say?

For according to him, Rosh Hashanah should be learned from the days of the inauguration, since in both of them the sacrifices are from communal property, and not Yom Kippur, on which the priest brings the bull and the ram from his private property!?

For it was taught:

Every place where it is said in the Torah:

“Take for yourself

”—it is

from your own.

And

likewise

“Make for yourself

”—it is

from your own.

But every place where it is said

“and they shall take for you

”—it is

from communal property, the words of Rabbi Yashya.

Rabbi Yonatan says: Both “take for yourself” and “they shall take for you

”—are from communal property.

And what is the purpose of stating

in the matter of the incense, that the Holy One, blessed is He, said to Moses

“Take for yourself

spices,” whose meaning is “from your own”?

The Holy One, blessed is He, said to Moses,

as it were [

if this were possible],

“I want it from your own

that the incense should come

more than theirs.”

Abba Hanan said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: One verse says [Deuteronomy 10:1]

[Deuteronomy 10:1]

“And you shall make for yourself an ark of wood

—which implies that you should make it from your own.

And

if

one verse says [Exodus 25:10]

[Exodus 25:10]

“And they shall make an ark of acacia wood

—which implies from communal property.

How is this [resolved]?

Here—

when Israel do the will of the Omnipresent

, the making is attributed to the community.

Here—

when they do not do the will of the Omnipresent [

after the sin of the calf], the making is attributed to Moses.

And it is explained in this beraita that according to Rabbi Yashya, even where it says “take for yourself,” its meaning is “from the community.” And according to him, the question is difficult: Why should the separation before Rosh Hashanah not be learned from the separation during the days of the inauguration? After all, in both cases the sacrifices are from the community, [whereas on Yom Kippur the priest’s sacrifices are his].

And the Gemara answers:

They disagree only

all the tannaim in the beraita

about ordinary “takings,” and

about

ordinary “makings.”

And the Gemara explains:

Ordinary takings—

such as the one stated [Exodus 30:34]:

“Take for yourself spices

Ordinary makings—

such as [Numbers 10:2]

“Make for yourself two silver trumpets.”

But these—

the takings of the inauguration sacrifices and the takings of the Yom Kippur sacrifices—the Torah did not write in them merely “take for yourself.”

Rather

it explicitly interprets

the verse, whose meaning of “take for yourself,” as stated in them, is—

that it is from your own

specifically

that it

comes, and not from communal property.

It follows that according to everyone, the inauguration sacrifices and the Yom Kippur sacrifices are alike: only they come from the priests’ money, and not other sacrifices. And the Gemara’s question why the separation before Rosh Hashanah is not learned is thereby resolved.

And the Gemara explains where the Torah revealed that the inauguration sacrifices and the Yom Kippur sacrifices are from the priest’s property:

Regarding the inauguration: Since

after all

it is written [Leviticus 9:3]

[Leviticus 9:3]

“And to the Children of Israel you shall speak, saying: Take a he-goat for a sin-offering

—and the verse did not say, “Take for yourselves.”

And if so, in the preceding verse, in the command to Aaron, where the verse said:

“And he said

[Moses]

to Aaron: Take for yourself a calf, a son of cattle, for a sin-offering”—

why do I need

the added word “for yourself”?

Infer from it

that the verse comes to explain that

“take for yourself

said concerning Aaron—is

from your own

, and not from communal property.

On Yom Kippur:

Since

after all

it is written [Leviticus 16:3]

[Leviticus 16:3]

“With this Aaron shall enter the Sanctuary: with a bull, a son of cattle, for a sin-offering

And later the verse said:

“And from the assembly of the Children of Israel he shall take two he-goats for a sin-offering.”

And if so, it is clear that the sin-offering of the High Priest is a bull, whereas the sin-offering of the community is the two goats. And if so, when the verse said concerning Aaron’s sin-offering bull

“And he shall bring the bull of the sin-offering that is his

—why do I need

to specify and say “that is his”? After all, it is clear that this bull is his sacrifice, and not the sacrifice of the community!?

Rather, from here

infer

that

this “

that

is his”—

it is from his own.

Rav Ashi said

another resolution of why the separation before Rosh Hashanah and before Shavuot is not learned:

The bull for a sin-offering and the ram for a burnt-offering

of Yom Kippur

are learned from a bull for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering

of the inauguration.

To exclude

to exclude

Rosh Hashanah and Shavuot, for both of them

, both the bull and the ram—

are burnt-offerings.

Ravina said

another resolution:

The service

of Yom Kippur, which is performed only

by the High Priest, is learned from the service

of the eighth day of the inauguration, which was performed only

by the High Priest.

To exclude all the questions,

to exclude all the other festivals concerning which we asked why there should not be separation in them, since

they are not service by the High Priest

specifically

they are, but the service can be performed by an ordinary priest.

services that can be performed by an ordinary priest.

And some say

thus

Ravina said:

“Service at the beginning” is learned from “service at the beginning

” [as the Gemara will explain],

to exclude these—

for they are not at the beginning.

And we raised the question:

What is meant by “beginning

? If you say, “beginning—

with the High Priest.”

That is, Yom Kippur is learned from the days of the inauguration because in both cases “at the beginning”—the first service—was assigned to the High Priest. For on the first Yom Kippur the service of the communal sacrifices was assigned for the first time specifically to the High Priest, and likewise on the eighth day of the inauguration the first service in the Sanctuary was assigned specifically to the High Priest.

But this explanation

is

the explanation that Ravina stated according to the first formulation,

the first

formulation; and what did the “some say” innovate here?

Rather

, the learning is that of

“service at the beginning in the place

, for on the first Yom Kippur the High Priest entered for the first time into the innermost place,

from “service at the beginning in the place

,” for on the eighth day of the inauguration Aaron approached the service at the outer altar for the first time.

When

when

Rav Dimi

came from the Land of Israel to Babylonia,

he said:

Concerning what the verse said, “to perform atonement,” from which they learned that there is an idea of separation also in another place:

Rabbi Yohanan teaches

a single

one

separation in it.

Rabbi Joshua ben Levi teaches

in it

two

separations.

And the Gemara explains their dispute:

Rabbi Yohanan teaches one: “To perform atonement

m

”—these are the procedures of Yom Kippur.

refers to the Yom Kippur service.

And Rabbi Joshua ben Levi teaches two: “To perform

”—these are the procedures of the cow.

“Atone”

—these are the procedures of Yom Kippur.

And we are astonished: Does

Rabbi Yohanan teach

only

one

separation, separation before Yom Kippur, and does he not expound from here also the separation of the priest who burns the ashes of the cow!?

But did we not learn: “Seven days before Yom Kippur

the High Priest is separated”?

And

we also learned in tractate Parah:

“Seven days before the burning of the cow

the priest who burns it is separated”? And we answer: This separation that we learned for the priest who burns the cow

is merely an enhancement,

which the Sages instituted, and it is not from the Torah.

And the Gemara challenges what we established concerning the law of separation of the priest who burns the cow as merely an enhancement, according to Rabbi Yohanan:

But Rabbi Maniyomi bar Helkiah said in the name of Rabbi Mahasya bar Idi,

Rabbi Yohanan said:

“As He did on this day, the Lord commanded to perform

m

atonement for you.”

“To perform

m

”—

these are the procedures of the cow.

“Atone

”—these are the procedures of Yom Kippur!

And the Gemara answers:

That—

of his teacher,

that this teaching, that one should learn it from the verse, he said in the name of his teacher. But Rabbi Yohanan himself holds that it is merely an enhancement.

And the proof that he said it in the name of his teacher is:

For when

when

Ravin

came from the Land of Israel,

he said

in the name of

Rabbi Yohanan,

who said

in the name of Rabbi Yishmael:

“To perform

”—these are the procedures of the cow.

“Atone

”—these are the procedures of Yom Kippur.

And

Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yohanan: From where do you derive it

for the separation of the High Priest before Yom Kippur—

from the inauguration.

If, just as the inauguration—

everything written concerning them prevents their validity [

as will be explained below],

so here too,

in the separation on Yom Kippur, shall we say—

everything written concerning it prevents its validity.

And if you will say, so too.

But did we not learn: “And they prepare another priest for him,” and it does not teach “they separate

another priest”?

And if separation is indispensable, the other priest must also be separated. For otherwise he cannot fill the place of the disqualified High Priest.

And if you will say, what is meant by “they prepare

another priest for him”—

they separate

him.

If so,

let it teach

in our Mishna

either both this and that,

both the High Priest and his replacement,

“they prepare

,” or both this and that, “they separate

.” And why did the tannai say concerning the High Priest “they separate,” and concerning the other priest “they prepare”?

He said to him

Rabbi Yohanan to Reish Lakish:

Rather, master—

from where do you derive it

for separation?

He said

Reish Lakish:

From

Moses’ separation at

Sinai,

before his entering the camp of the Divine Presence at the top of Mount Sinai.

For it is written [Exodus 24:16]

[Exodus 24:16]:

“And the glory of the Lord rested upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it

[Moses]

for six days.

And He called to Moses on the seventh day.”

Since,

after all,

it is written, “And He called to Moses on the seventh day

”.

What,

what significance was there in Moses’ being covered by the cloud for

“six days

”?

Rather, this is a “foundational teaching

—here the Torah taught a general rule:

Everyone who enters the camp of the Divine Presence—

requires separation for six

days before his entry.

And even entry on Yom Kippur into the innermost place requires separation beforehand.

And we challenge:

But did we not

learn separation of

seven

days

in our Mishna,

and not six!?

And we answer:

Our Mishna—

is [the view of] Rabbi Judah ben Bathyra

!