(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 43

YOMA 42, 43 have been anonymously sponsored towards a REFU'AH SHELEMAH to Shmuel Yakov ben Ayala Hinda, Ilana Golda bas Chana and Klarees Marcia bas Mammie.



(a) We learn from "ve'Shachat *Osah*" - that one may not Shecht another animal together with the Parah Adumah (using a long knife - See Tosfos Yeshanim).

(b) In the opinion of Rav (according to whom *Elazar* had to Shecht the Parah), the Torah needs to write "ve'Lakach *Elazar ha'Kohen* mi'Damah be'Etzba'o" - that even an ordinary Kohen was permitted to receive the blood (because of the principle 'Ein Mi'ut Achar Mi'ut Ela Lerabos' - when one exclusion follows another, the Torah comes to *in*clude).

(c) The Torah continues "ve'Lakach Eitz Erez" ...

1. ... according to Shmuel - to permit even an ordinary Kohen to throw the cedar wood into the burning cow.
2. ... according to Rav - for the same reason, because we would otherwise have thought that, because this is not an Avodah on the actual *body of the cow*, it does not even require a Kohen to perform it.
(d) We learn from "ve'Chibes Begadav ha'Kohen" - to teach us that the Kohen must wear the Bigdei Kehunah when preparing the Parah Adumah (even though he is not performing it in the Azarah).
2) According to those who learned above that, in future generations, the cow must be prepared by the Kohen Gadol - it is indeed obvious that he must wear his Bigdei Kehunah Gedolah; nevertheless, 'Milsa de'Asya be'Kal va'Chomer, Tarach ve'Kasav Lah Kera' (the Torah sometimes takes the trouble to write something specifically, even though we already know it from a Kal va'Chomer).


(a) We learn from "ve'Asaf ...
  1. ... Ish - to include a Zar in the gathering of the ashes.
  2. ... Tahor - to include a woman.
  3. ... ve'Hini'ach" - to preclude a Cheresh, Shoteh and Katan (who do not have Da'as - proper understanding of what they are doing).
(b) We cannot use "Tahor" to preclude someone who is Tamei - since (seeing as the Torah refers to the Parah as a 'Chatas'), that is obvious.

(c) The Tana Kama of the Mishnah in Parah learns from "*ve'Lakchu* la'Tamei me'Afar Sereifas ha'Chatas", that whoever is disqualified from *gathering the ashes* of the Parah is also disqualified from making the *Kidush* (mixing the ashes and the water) - i.e. a Cheresh, Shoteh and Katan.

(d) Rebbi Yehudah learns from the fact that the Torah writes "ve'Lakchu" (rather than "ve'Lakach") - to include a Katan.

(a) Rebbi Yehudah disqualifies a woman and an Androginus (a person with both male and female organs) from making the Kidush, from the word "ve'Nasan" (written in the masculine form).

(b) The Rabbanan counter that the Torah could not possibly have written "ve'Lakach ve'Nasan" - because then we would have thought that the same person who takes the ashes must place them into the water (so the Torah writes "ve'Lakchu" "ve'Nasan" to teach us that it need not be the same person).

(c) And had the Torah written "ve'Lakchu ve'Nasnu" - we would have thought that it requires two to take the ashes and two to place them into the water.

(d) The Torah continues "ve'Lakach Eizov ve'Taval ba'Mayim Ish Tahor"(with regard to the sprinkling towards the Heichal - after the Kidush). According to the Rabbanan, "ve'Lakach" comes to *pre*clude a woman, and Tahor, to *in*clude a child; according to Rebbi Yehudah, "Ish" comes to *pre*clude a Katan, and "Tahor", to *in*clude a woman.

(a) The Mishnah in Parah disqualifies a Tumtum, an Androginus and a woman from sprinkling the Mei Chatas, and permits a child - whose mother would help him, if he was too small to do it by himself.

(b) Even though Rebbi Yehudah does not make a statement in that Mishnah - he *must* in fact argue - because otherwise, why does the Torah write "Ish" and "Tahor" according to Rebbi Yehudah (and we opened the Sugya with the statement that every phrase must be Darshened in its own right, either to preclude from what the previous Pasuk said or to retain it).




(a) The Pasuk continues "ve'Hizah *ha'Tahor* al ha'Tamei" - to teach us "ha'Tahor" 'mi'Ch'lal she'Hu Tamei', that a Tevul Yom (who is still partiallt Tamei) is Kasher to prepare the Parah.

(b) Rebbi Asi testified that, when Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish delved into the Parah Adumah, they could only conclude from it as much as a fox walking through a plowed field. What he meant was, that they were unable to find a way of learning all the Pesukim by Parah Adumah uniformly, only some of them *preclude* from the previous Pasuk, and others *retain* it (as we explained earlier) {it is unclear though, what Rav Asi has added to what we already know}.

(c) When the Beraisa expert quoted to Rebbi Yochanan, a Beraisa that validated all Shechitos performed by a Zar except for that of the Parah Adumah - he told him to take his Beraisa outside the Beis Hamedrash - because there is no such thing as a Shechitah that cannot be performed by a Zar.

(d) He also disagreed with his Rebbi, Rebbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak, who concurred with the Tana of the Beraisa.

7) The reason that the Kohen Gadol not include the other Kohanim already in the *first* Viduy - is because it is correct for the person who comes to atone for others, to first be clean of sin before purifying others ('Yavo *Zakai* vi'Yechaper al ha'Chayav ... ').


(a) The Kohen Gadol Shechted his bull and received its blood in a bowl, which he then gave to another Kohen to stir - to prevent it from congealing (since he first had to perform other Avodos, before sprinkling the blood - and all Avodos on Yom Kipur had to be performed by him).

(b) The Kohen stirred the blood whilst standing on the fourth row of marble tiles (we shall see later exactly where these tiles were).

(c) The Kohen Gadol then took coals from the Ma'arachah on top of the Mizbe'ach ha'Olah (from the innermost, well-burned coals) - and placed the pan that contained them on the same fourth row of tiles where the Kohen was stirring the bowl of his bull.

1. The fire-pan that was used for the daily ritual of Ketores was made of *silver*, whereas the one that was used by the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur was made of *gold*.
2. Normally, the Kohen would then pour the Ketores from the *silver* pan into a *golden* one, whereas on Yom Kipur, the Ketores remained in the original golden one.
(b) The silver pan that he used each day contained *four* Sa'ah, and the golden one, *three*. According to Rebbi Yossi, the silver pan, contained one Sa'ah (*six* Kabin).

(c) The handles of both pans used during the year were short, whereas that of the pan used on Yom Kipur was long - to enable the Kohen Gadol to place the tip of the handle under his arm-pit, to help him support the pan.

(d) All of these changes were to ease the heavy burden of the Kohen Gadol, who had a hectic schedule of Avodah that day, in addition to which he was fasting.

(a) The pans used for the regular Ketores were of a yellowish-gold, whereas that of Yom Kipur was of a reddish hue.

(b) The Kohen Gadol would add two fistfuls to the Manah that was brought daily.

(c) Half a Manah was normally brought in the morning, and half a Manah in the afternoon - on the Mizbe'ach ha'Ketores. The extra handful was brought into the Kodesh Kodshim in the morning.

(d) The regular Ketores was ground fine, that of Yom Kipur extra-fine - it was returned to the grinder on Erev Yom Kipur to be ground once more.

(a) During the year, the Kohanim ...
1. ... would ascend the ramp on the east (the closest to the right side of the Mizbe'ach (where he would turn when he got to the top); The Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur would demonstrate his importance in the eyes of Hashem by ascending the ramp in the middle.
2. ... (and even the Kohen Gadol) would perform Kidush Yadayim ve'Raglayim from the Kiyor; whereas the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur would do so from a golden jug.
(b) According to Rebbi Yehudah - the Kohen Gadol *always* washed from the golden jug.

(c) The Tana'im argue whether there were *two* Ma'arachos on the Mizbe'ach (on the Mizbe'ach), *three* or *four*. They all concede however, that there was one extra Ma'arachah on Yom Kipur.

12) Our Tana places the Kohen who held the bowl of blood, not on the fourth row *in* the Heichal (since he was forbidden to remain in the Heichal as long as the Kohen performed the Avodos P'nim), but *from* the Heichal - i.e. the fourth row (in the Ulam or in the Azarah).

Next daf


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