(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Yoma 34

YOMA 32-35 - anonymously sponsored towards a REFU'AH SHELEMAH to Shmuel Yakov ben Ayala Hinda, Ilana Golda bas Chana and Klarees Marcia bas Mammie



(a) Abaye prefers the opinion which gives precedence to the *Musafin* over the *Bazichin* rather than vice-versa - because the Torah writes in Emor (with regard to the Bazichin) "*be'Yom* ha'Shabbos Ya'archenu", and, in the same way as "ba'Boker" denotes an *earlier* time, "ba'Yom" denotes a *later* one.

(b) The 'Gezeirah Shavah' "Chukah" "Chukah" helps to give precedence to the Bazichin over the Musafin. The Gezeirah Shavah does not extend as far as giving the Bazichin precedence over the Nesachim too - because for that, the word "be'Yom" is effective - to place the Bazichin *after* the Nesachim.

(a) The Tana of our Mishnah places the Ketores between the Dam and the Evarim. According to Aba Shaul, he ought to have placed it between the Hatavas Sht'ei Neros and the Evarim.

(b) The author of our Mishnah is in fact the Rabbanan of Aba Shaul. they did not say between the Dam and the *(two) Neros*, because they were not particular about the details (since technically, the statement is correct). See Tosfos, DH 'Le'olam', as to why the Gemara did not alternatively establish our Mishnah like Aba Shaul, explaning it in the same way as it explained it according to the Rabbanan.

(a) Rebbi Yochanan learns from the Pasuk in Pinchas "ke'Minchas ha'Boker u'Chenisko Ta'aseh" - that, just like the morning Ketores preceded the Nesachim, so too, should it precede the Nesachim of the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim.

(b) It does not however, precede the *Evarim* of the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim (as it does in the morning) - since the Torah does not write "ke'*Evrei* ha'Boker, but "ke*'Minchas* ha'Boker".




(a) The Rabbanan prefer to learn the Nesech (by the Tamid shel Shachar) from the Tamid shel *Bein ha'Arbayim* - because that is where it (the Pasuk "ve'Nisko Revi'is ha'Hin") is written.

(b) Rebbi learns from the continuation of the Pasuk "la'Keves ha'Echad" - that "ve'Nisko Revi'is ha'Hin" refers to the Tamid shel *Shachar*, which the Torah calls "Echad" (as opposed to the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim, which it calls "ha'Sheni").

(c) The Rabbanan learn from "*ha'Echad*" - that when one gives a Korban to Hashem it should be from the best (since 'Echad' has a connotation of 'Meyuchad' - special).

(d) The Rabbanan require *two* Pesukim to teach us this lesson - one by a *voluntary* Korban (which needs to be good quality in order to be accepted as a gift), and the other, by an *obligatory* one (which needs to be good quality, in order to fulfill one's obligation).

(a) Our Mishnah permits placing heated metal bars into the cold Mikveh on Yom Kipur for a Kohen Gadol who is finicky. The problem with this is that it involves Tziruf (since placing boiling metal into cold water strengthens it - and is considered a Melachah on Shabbos and Yom-Tov).

(b) We initially get round this by establishing our Mishnah when the metal bars were not heated to the extent that placing them into cold water will result in Tziruf.

(c) Abaye answers that, even if the metal bars *did* reach the stage of Tziruf, it will be permitted to place them into the Mikveh on Yom Kipur - because the Tziruf is performed unintentionally (and 'Davar she'Eino Miskaven, Mutar').

(a) Rebbi Yashiyah learns from the Pasuk in Shemini "Besar Orlaso" - that the Mitzvah of Milah over-rides the prohibition of cutting away the mark of Tzara'as.

(b) Why do we need a Pasuk, asks the Gemara? Is it not obvious, since the sin is performed unintentionally? (Note: Tziruf is not 'Pesik Reisha'. See Tosfos DH 'Hani Mili' - near the beginning of Daf 35a.)

(c) Abaye answers that the Pasuk is needed according to Rebbi Yehudah, who holds 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Asur' - in other words, the Pasuk is redundant according to Rebbi Shimon (who holds Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Mutar') - which means that Abaye must hold like Rebbi Yehudah.

(d) But how can Abaye now rule that 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Asur', when he just said that Tziruf is permitted because it is 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven'.

7) So we answer that Abaye's ruling 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Asur' (like Rebbi Yehudah), is confined to Isurim d'Oraysa (such as the La'av of cutting away Tzara'as), but does not apply to Isurim de'Rabbanan, such as Tziruf.


(a) They then took the Kohen Gadol to the Beis ha'Parvah - to Tovel his second Tevilah (in the Kodesh).

(b) He made Kidush Yadayim ve'Raglayim ...

  1. ... according to the Tana Kama - *before* he removed his clothes.
  2. ... according to Rebbi Meir - *after* he removed them.
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, the Bigdei Lavan that he wore in the morning were made of linen from Pilusin worth *twelve* Manah (twelve hundred Zuz) - and those that he wore in the afternoon, *eight* Manah (eight hundred Zuz).

(b) The Bigdei Lavan on the *morning* refers to the bringing the Kaf and the Machtah *into* the Kodesh Kodshim, those that he wore in the *afternoon*, to taking them *out*.

(c) According to the Rabbanan, the Kohen Gadol's morning Bigdei Lavan were worth *eighteen* Manah (eighteen hundred Zuz), and those that he wore in the afternoon, *twelve* Manah.

(a) The money for these clothes came out of public funds.

(b) The Kohen Gadol was permitted to use more expensive clothes than those specified - provided he paid the difference from his own pocket.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,