Midrash su Levitico 16:78

(Lev. 16:1:) NOW THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES AFTER THE DEATH OF < AARON'S TWO SONS >…. This text is related (to Eccl. 9:2): SINCE EVERYTHING < HAPPENS > TO EVERYONE, THE SAME LOT < FALLS > TO THE RIGHTEOUS AND TO THE WICKED…. Solomon looked and foresaw the righteous and the wicked in all generations, and he saw things that would happen to the righteous and happen to the wicked.¹Tanh., Lev. 6:1; cf. below, Deut. 2:1; Lev. R. 20:1; Eccl. R. 9:2:1; PRK 26:1. Then he said (in vs. 3): THIS IS AN EVIL IN ALL WHICH HAPPENS UNDER THE SUN, IN THAT THE SAME LOT < FALLS > TO EVERYONE. (Vs. 2:) SINCE EVERYTHING < HAPPENS > TO EVERYONE, THE SAME LOT < FALLS > TO THE RIGHTEOUS. This refers to Abraham, in that he was called righteous, as stated (in Gen. 18:19): FOR I HAVE CHOSEN HIM [SO] THAT HE MAY CHARGE < HIS CHILDREN AND HIS HOUSEHOLD AFTER HIM TO KEEP THE WAY OF THE LORD >, [TO PRACTICE RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUSTICE]. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) < AND > TO THE WICKED. This refers to Nimrod, who incited all the whole world against the Holy One. The former is dead, and the latter is dead. (Ibid., cont.:) TO THE GOOD, TO THE CLEAN, [AND TO THE UNCLEAN. TO THE GOOD] refers to David, of whom it is stated (in I Sam. 16:12): < WITH > BEAUTIFUL EYES AND GOOD APPEARANCE TO THE UNCLEAN refers to Nebuchadnezzar. The former laid the foundation of the Temple, and the latter destroyed it. The former reigned forty years, and the latter reigned forty years. (Eccl., 9:2, cont.:) TO THE ONE WHO SACRIFICES. This refers to Solomon, of whom it is stated (in I Kings 8:63): SOLOMON SACRIFICED TWENTY-TWO THOUSAND OXEN < AND A HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND SHEEP > AS PEACE OFFERINGS, WHICH HE SACRIFICED TO THE LORD. (Eccl., 9:2, cont.:) AND TO THE ONE WHO DOES NOT SACRIFICE. This refers to Jeroboam, who stopped Israel from going up < to Jerusalem > on pilgrimage, as stated (in I Kings 12:28): ENOUGH OF YOUR GOING UP TO JERUSALEM…. The latter one reigned after the former one. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) AS IT IS WITH THE GOOD. This refers to Moses, of whom it is stated (in Exod. 2:2): AND WHEN SHE SAW THAT HE WAS GOOD. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) SO IT IS WITH THE SINNER. This refers to the spies (in Numb. 13–14)), of whom it is stated (in Prov. 13:21): EVIL PURSUES SINNERS. Moses did not enter the land, neither did those < spies > enter the land. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) AND THE ONE WHO TAKES AN OATH (without keeping it). This refers to Zedekiah, of whom it is stated (in II Chron 36:13): < AND > HE ALSO REBELLED AGAINST KING NEBUCHADNEZZAR, WHO HAD MADE HIM TAKE AN OATH [BY] GOD. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) < IS > {EVERYONE} [AS THE ONE] WHO FEARS AN OATH. This refers to Samson, of whom it is stated (in Jud. 15:12): THEN SAMSON SAID {UNTO} [TO] THEM: SWEAR TO ME…. They put out the eyes of the former, and they put out the eyes of the latter.

(Lev. 16:1:) “After the death of Aaron's two sons.” This text is related (to Eccl. 9:2), “Since everything [happens] to everyone, the same lot [falls] to the righteous and to the wicked […].” Solomon looked and foresaw the righteous and the wicked in all generations, and he saw things that would happen to the righteous and happen to the wicked.¹Cf. below, Deut. 2:1; Lev. R. 20:1; Eccl. R. 9:2:1; PRK 26:1. Then he said (in vs. 3), “This is an evil in all which happens under the sun, in that the same lot [falls] to everyone.” (Vs. 2:) “Since everything [happens] to everyone, the same lot [falls] to the righteous.” This refers to Abraham, in that he was called righteous, as stated (in Gen. 18:19), “For I have chosen him [so] that he may charge [his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord], to practice righteousness.” (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) “And to the wicked.” This refers to Nimrod, who incited all the whole world against the Holy One, blessed be He. The former is dead, and the latter is dead. (Ibid., cont.:) “To the good, to the clean, and to the unclean.” “To the good” refers to David, of whom it is stated (in I Sam. 16:12), “So they sent and brought him, reddish, with beautiful eyes and good appearance.” “To the unclean” refers to Nebuchadnezzar. David [laid the foundation of] the Temple, and Nebuchadnezzar destroyed it. The former reigned forty years, and the latter reigned forty years. (Eccl., 9:2, cont.:) “To the one who sacrifices.” This refers to Solomon, of whom it is stated (in I Kings 8:63), “Solomon sacrificed [twenty-two thousand oxen and a hundred and twenty thousand sheep] as peace offerings.” (Eccl., 9:2, cont.:) “And to the one who does not sacrifice.” This refers to Jeroboam, who stopped Israel from going up [to Jerusalem] on pilgrimage, as stated (in I Kings 12:28), “Enough of your going up to Jerusalem.” The latter one reigned after the former one. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) “As it is with the good.” This refers to Moses, of whom it is stated (in Exod. 2:2), “and when she saw that he was good.” (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) “So it is with the sinner.” This refers to the spies (in Numb. 13-14), of whom it is stated (in Prov. 13:21), “Evil pursues sinners.” Moses did not enter the land, neither did the spies enter the land. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) “And the one who takes an oath (without keeping it). This refers to Zedekiah, of whom it is stated (in II Chron. 36:13), “And he also rebelled against King Nebuchadnezzar, who had made him take an oath of God.” (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) “Is as the one who fears an oath.” This refers to Samson, of whom it is stated (in Jud. 15:12), “then Samson said to them, ‘Swear to me […].’” They put out the eyes of the former, and they put out the eyes of the latter. Hence Solomon said (Eccl 9:3), “This is an evil in all which happens under the sun.” Another interpretation (of Eccl. 9:2), “as it is with the good”: This refers to the children of Aaron. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) “So it is with the sinner.” This refers to those who opposed Aaron, [namely] Korah and his congregation. Now they were destroyed by fire, as stated (in Numb. 16:35), “And a fire went forth from the Lord”; [also when] the children of Aaron entered to offer sacrifice, they were consumed by fire, [as stated (Lev. 10:2),] “So fire came forth from before the Lord and consumed them.” R. Abba bar Kahana opened (with Eccl. 2:2), “’Of laughter I said, “It is mad,” and of rejoicing, “What does that do?”’ How confused is the laughter of the evil,²Eccl. R. 2:2:1; PRK 26(27):2. which they produce in their theater³Gk.: theatra. [houses] and racing arenas.⁴Lat.: circi; cf. Gk.: kirkoi (“circles”). ‘And of rejoicing, what does that do?’ What enjoyment would the disciples of the sages have there?”⁵I.e., what confused, popular enjoyment can compare to the delights of Torah study? Another interpretation (of Eccl. 2:2), “Of laughter I said, ‘It is mad’”: R. Aha said, “Solomon has said, ‘There are things over which divine justice laughs (that I have confused).’ It is written (in Deut. 17:17), ‘he shall not multiply wives for himself’; but it is written (in I Kings 11:3), ‘So he had seven hundred royal wives.’⁶Cf. Tanh., (Buber) Exod. 2:2; Eccl. R. 2:2:3; PRK 26(27):2; ySanh. 2:6 (20c). It is written (in Deut. 17:16), ‘he shall not multiply horses for himself’; but it is written (in I Kings 5:6), ‘Now Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses.’ It is written (in Deut. 17:17, cont.) ‘he shall not multiply silver and gold for himself’; but it is written (in I Kings 10:27), ‘And the king made silver in Jerusalem as plentiful as stones,’ and [the ingots] were not stolen.” R. Jose bar Hanina said, “They were like stones of ten cubits and like stones of eight cubits.”⁷I.e., they were too heavy to be stolen. R. Simeon ben Johay said in a baraita, “Even the weights which they had in the days of Solomon were of gold, as it is written, (in I Kings 10:21), ‘silver was not [...] considered to be anything.’” (Eccl. 2:2:) “And of rejoicing, ‘What does that do?’” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “What is this crown doing in your hand? Get down off your throne.” Immediately an angel in the likeness of Solomon descended and sat upon his throne. Then Solomon went around among the synagogues and academies in Jerusalem and said (in Eccl. 1:12), “I, Koheleth, was king over Israel in Jerusalem.” But they said to him, “King Solomon is sitting on his throne, and you are getting crazier and crazier.” Then they struck him with a rod and set a bowl of grits before him.⁸I.e., they fed him like a beggar. In that hour Solomon said (in Eccl. 2:10), “And this was my portion from all my labor.” And some say [he was referring] to the cane in his hand, and some say, to his dish, and some say to his staff. At that time, Solomon said, “’Vanity of vanities,’ said Koheleth.” (Eccl. 2:2:), “Of laughter I said, ‘It is mad!’” R. Pinhas said, “How confused was the laughter, when divine justice laughed over the generation of the flood, as stated (in Job 21:10-13), ‘Their bull breeds and does not fail […].⁹TSot. 3:6-7; Eccl. R. 2:2:1; PRK 26(27):2; cf. Gen. R. 36:1. They send forth their little ones like a flock […]. They sing to timbrel and harp […]. They spend [their days] in prosperity.’ When they said (in vs. 15), ‘What is the Almighty that we should serve him,’ the Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (in Eccl. 2:2), ‘And of rejoicing, “What does that do?”’ By your life, I am destroying your memory from the world, as stated (in Gen. 7:23), “And He wiped out all living things.”’” Another interpretation (of Eccl. 2:2), “Of laughter I said, ‘It is mad’”: How confused was the laughter, when divine justice laughed over the people of Sodom,¹⁰See also TSot. 3:11. as stated (Job 28:5-8), “The earth, out of it comes forth bread…. Its stones are the place of sapphires…. No bird of prey knows a path [to it]…. Proud beasts have not trodden it.” When they said, “Let us forget the law of the traveler in our midst,” immediately (in Job 28:4), “A stream burst through from its source”; the Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (Eccl. 2:2), “’And of rejoicing, “What does that do?”’ By your life, I will make you forgotten by the world.” This is what is written (in Gen. 19:24), “Then the Lord rained down upon Sodom….” Another interpretation (of Eccl. 2:2), “Of laughter I said, ‘It is mad’”: How confused was the laughter, when divine justice laughed over Elisheba bat Amminadab,¹¹Aaron’s wife and Naashon’s sister according to Exod. 6:23. when she saw four celebrations in one day.¹²Tanh. (Buber), Lev. 3:3; Lev. R. 20:2; Eccl. R. 2:2:2. She saw her [brother-in-law] (Moses) a king, her husband a high priest, her brother (Naashon) a prince (nasi),¹³Naashon is here being identified with Nahshon ben Amminadab, whom Numb. 2:3; 7:11f.; and I Chron. 2:10 call a prince (nasi). and her two sons deputy high priests. When they went in to offer sacrifice, they came out destroyed by fire; and her celebration turned into mourning, as stated (in Lev. 16:1), “Now the Lord spoke unto Moses after the death of Aaron's two sons.”

“Everything is as it is for everyone; there is one fate for the righteous and for the wicked, for the good, for the pure and for the impure, for one who sacrifices and for one who does not sacrifice; like the good, so is the sinner; one who takes an oath is like one who is apprehensive of an oath” (Ecclesiastes 9:2).
Rabbi Shimon bar Abba began: “Everything is as it is for everyone; there is one fate for the righteous” – this is Noah, as it is stated: “Noah was a righteous man, he was faultless” (Genesis 6:9). They said that when he emerged from the ark, a lion bit him and injured him, and he was limping. “And for the wicked” – this is Pharaoh. They said that when Pharaoh came to sit on Solomon’s throne, that he took as payment for his daughter’s marriage contract,¹Solomon had married the daughter of Pharaoh (I Kings 3:1). he did not know its mechanism, and a lion bit him and injured him, and he was limping. This one died with a limp, and that one died with a limp; that is: “There is one fate for the righteous and for the wicked.”
“For the good” – this is Moses, as it is stated: “She saw him, that he was good” (Exodus 2:2). Rabbi Meir said: “Good” – that he was circumcised. “And for the pure” – this is Aaron, who was engaged in the purification of Israel. “And for the impure” – these are the scouts who spoke slander about the Land and did not enter the Land. These²Moses and Aaron spoke of the goodness and praise of the Land of Israel, and did not enter it.³Thus, “there is one fate for the righteous and for the wicked.”
“For one who sacrifices” – this is Josiah, as it is written: “Josiah donated to the members of the people…[for the paschal offering]” (II Chronicles 35:7). “And for one who does not sacrifice” – this is Ahab, who abolished offerings from upon the altar.⁴He prevented his subjects from taking offerings to sacrifice in Jerusalem. This one died with arrows, and that one died with arrows.
“Like the good” – this is David, in whose regard it is written: “And of good appearance” (I Samuel 16:12). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Of good appearance in halakha, as anyone who would see him would remember his learning. “So is the sinner” – this is Nebuchadnezzar, as it is written: “Redeem your sins with charity” (Daniel 4:24). This one built the Temple⁵David laid the foundations of the Temple (see Tanḥuma, Aḥarei 1; Etz Yosef). and ruled for forty years, that one destroyed it and ruled for forty years; that is: “One fate.”
“One who takes an oath” – this is Zedekiah, as it is written: “[He also rebelled against King Nebuchadnezzar,] who had administered an oath to him [by God]” (II Chronicles 36:13). On what [object] did he administer the oath? Rabbi Yosei said: He administered the oath to him on the covenant.⁶The covenant of circumcision. Rabbi said: He administered the oath to him on the altar. “Is like one who is apprehensive of an oath” – this is Samson, as it is stated: “Take an oath to me” (Judges 15:12).⁷The men of Judah sought to bind Samson and deliver him to his enemies, the Philistines. Samson was not afraid of being handed to the Philistines, but sought an oath from the men of Judah that they themselves would not harm him. From the fact that he relied on their oath, it may be derived that Samson viewed taking an oath with the utmost seriousness (Yefei To’ar). This one died with his eyes gouged out, and that one died with his eyes gouged out.
Another matter, “for the righteous” – these are Aaron’s sons. “And for the wicked” – this is the congregation of Koraḥ. These entered to sacrifice in dispute and emerged burned, and the sons of Aaron, who did not enter in dispute, [also] emerged burned; that is what is written: “After the death of the two sons of Aaron…” (Leviticus 16:1).

YOMA (Fol. 2) Mishnah: Seven days before the Day of Atonement, the High-priest was removed from his house to the Palhedrin (counsellors') chamber, and another High-priest was appointed to substitute him in case he should meet with such an accident [as would incapacitate him for the service of that day]. R. Juda says: "Another wife was also appointed for him lest his own wife should meanwhile die, whereas it is said (Lev. 17, 11) And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house; his house, alludes to his wife." "If this be so," the sages remarked, "then there will be no end to the matter [the other wife may also die]."

Another interpretation (of Eccl. 9:2): AS IT IS WITH THE GOOD. This refers to the children of Aaron. (Eccl. 9:2, cont.:) SO IT IS WITH THE SINNER. This refers to those who opposed Aaron, Korah and his congregation. Now they were destroyed by fire, as stated (in Numb. 16:35): AND A FIRE WENT FORTH FROM THE LORD < …. > Also when the children of Aaron entered to offer sacrifice, they were consumed by fire. (Lev. 10:2:) SO FIRE CAME FORTH FROM BEFORE THE LORD AND CONSUMED THEM. The former offered sacrifice and were consumed by fire, and the latter offered sacrifice and were consumed by fire. So Solomon laments (in Eccl. 9:2): AS IT IS WITH THE GOOD, SO IT IS WITH THE SINNER. When the children of Aaron were consumed by fire, he sat and complained, saying: What sin has befallen my children that this should happen to them? Immediately the Holy One appeared to Moses and said to him: Go < and > console him. Where is it shown? Where it is so written (in Lev. 16:2) after the death of Aaron's two sons. And what did he say to him? SPEAK (DBR) UNTO YOUR BROTHER AARON…. Now speaking (rt.: DBR) can only mean consolation, even as you say (in Is. 40:2): SPEAK (rt.: DBR) TENDERLY TO JERUSALEM….

"Outside of the camp shall you send them": What is the intent of this (after "They shall send out of the camp")? From "They shall send out of the camp," I might think the intent is (only) that they not touch the ark or its bearers, but they should be assigned a place for themselves (inside the camp). It is, therefore, written "Outside of the camp shall you send them": "and they shall not make unclean their camps" — whence (i.e., from the three-fold repetition of "camp") they stated: There were three camps: the Israelite camp, the Levite camp, and the camp of the Shechinah. From the entrance to Jerusalem until the Temple mount — the Israelite camp. From the entrance to the Temple mount until the azarah (the Temple courtyard) — the Levite camp. From the entrance to the azarah and inwards — the camp of the Shechinah. (Ibid. 3) "in whose midst I dwell": Beloved are Israel, who, even when they are tamei, the Shechinah is among them, as it is written (Vayikra 16:16) "who dwells with them in the midst of their uncleanliness," and (Bamidbar) 35:34) "And you shall not defile the land which you inhabit, in which I dwell, for I, the L-rd, dwell in the midst of the children of Israel (even when they are unclean)."

Rabbi Pinḥas ben Yair began: “If you seek it like silver…” (Proverbs 2:4). If you seek matters of Torah like these hidden treasures, the Holy One blessed be He will not withhold your reward. This is analogous to a person, if he loses a sela or a kilarin²²This was a valuable ornament of gold inlaid with a jewel. in his house, he will kindle several lamps, several wicks, until he finds them. The matter can be inferred a fortiori; if for these, that [enhance] the temporal life of this world, a person kindles several lamps and several wicks until he discovers them and finds them, matters of Torah, that [are essential for] life in this world and in the World to Come, do you not need to search for them like these hidden treasures? That is: “If you seek it like silver….” Rabbi Elazar said: In all my days, no one preceded me to the study hall and I did not leave a person there and exit. One time I awoke early and I found the collectors of manure and collectors of straw,²³These individuals would arise very early to collect straw and manure from public thoroughfares in order to sell them as fertilizer. They had begun their work before Rabbi Elazar had gone to the study hall. and I said: “If you seek it like silver and search for it like for hidden treasures, then you will understand fear of the Lord” (Proverbs 2:4–5). We are not even like the collectors of manure and collectors of straw. Thus we have learned that Rabbi Pinḥas ben Yair used to say: Alacrity leads to cleanliness. Cleanliness leads to purity. Purity leads to sanctity. Sanctity leads to humility. Humility leads to fear of sin. Fear of sin leads to piety. Piety leads to the Divine Spirit. The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead. The resurrection of the dead leads to Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory.
Alacrity leads to cleanliness, as it is stated: “He shall complete atoning²⁴The term kapara means atonement as well as cleanliness. This verse, which is about the service of the High Priest in the Temple on Yom Kippur, indicates that it is the completion of a service, which is accomplished through alacrity, that leads to atonement, or cleanliness. for the Sanctuary” (Leviticus 16:20). Cleanliness leads to purity, as it is stated: “The priest shall atone for her and she will be purified” (Leviticus 12:8). Purity leads to sanctity, as it is stated: “He shall purify it and he shall sanctify it” (Leviticus 16:19). Sanctity leads to humility, as it is stated: “For so said the Exalted and Most High, who abides forever and whose name is holy: Exalted and holy I will dwell and I will be with the downtrodden and lowly” (Isaiah 57:15). Humility leads to fear of sin, as it is stated: “In the wake of humility is fear of the Lord…” (Proverbs 22:4). Fear of sin leads to piety, as it is stated: “Then you spoke in a vision to your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20).²⁵Some suggest that the text here should read: “The mercy [ḥesed] of the Lord is forever and ever upon those who fear Him” (Psalms 103:17), in accordance with the parallel text of the Jerusalem Talmud (Shekalim 3:3). The term ḥesed, translated in the verse as mercy, is related to the term ḥasidut, piety (see Etz Yosef). Piety leads to the Divine Spirit, as it is stated: “Then you spoke in a vision to your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20). The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, as it is stated: “I will place My spirit in you, and you will live” (Ezekiel 37:14). The resurrection of the dead leads to Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory, as it is stated: “Behold, I am sending Elijah the prophet to you [before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord]” (Malachi 3:23).²⁶“The great and terrible day of the Lord” is understood as a reference to the resurrection of the dead. Elijah will come before the resurrection of the dead, but it is the need to perform the resurrection of the dead that leads to his coming (Etz Yosef).
Rabbi Matna said: What wisdom made as a crown on its head, humility made as a sandal on its heel. What wisdom made a crown on its head [roshah], as it is stated: “The beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord” (Psalms 111:10), humility made a sandal on its heel [akevah], as it is stated: “In the wake of [ekev] humility is fear of the Lord…” (Proverbs 22:4).
The resurrection of the dead is by means of Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory. That is what is written: “Then you will understand fear of the Lord, and you will find knowledge of ” (Proverbs 2:5), this is the Divine Spirit.²⁷Commentaries struggle to understand this line, which does not prove that resurrection of the dead is by means of Elijah. Some suggest that it be deleted (Etz Yosef). Others suggest that this is a proof that alacrity eventually leads to understanding via the Divine Spirit, as indicated above. This is because the verse that precedes the one cited here relates to alacrity (Midrash HaMevoar).
Rabbi Simon [said] in the name of Rabbi Ḥalafta: [This is analogous] to a royal adviser who grew prominent in the king’s palace. The king said to him: ‘Make a request; what shall I give you?’ The adviser said: If I request silver and gold, he will give them to me; gems and pearls, he will give them to me. He said: I will request the king’s daughter, and everything will be included. So too, “In Givon, the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream at night; God said: Request; what shall I give you?” (I Kings 3:5). Solomon said: If I request silver, gold, gems and pearls, he will give them to me. But I will request wisdom and everything will be included. That is what is written: “Give Your servant an attentive heart” (I Kings 3:9). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Solomon, you requested wisdom and you did not request wealth and property and the lives of your enemies. By your life, wisdom is granted you, and thereby, I will give you wealth and property.’ Immediately, “Solomon awakened and behold, a dream” (I Kings 3:15). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The dream was fulfilled; a donkey brayed and he knew what it was braying, a bird tweeted and he knew what it was tweeting. Immediately, “he came to Jerusalem and stood before the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord. He sacrificed burnt offerings, he performed peace offerings, and he made a feast for all his servants” (I Kings 3:15). Rabbi Elazar said: From here it is derived that one makes a feast upon completion of the Torah. Rabbi Yudan said: It is to teach you that anyone who teaches Torah in public is privileged to have the Divine Spirit rest upon him, as so Solomon did. He taught and the Divine Spirit rested upon him and he composed three books: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs.

Rabbi Pinḥas ben Yair began: “If you seek it like silver…” (Proverbs 2:4). If you seek matters of Torah like these hidden treasures, the Holy One blessed be He will not withhold your reward. This is analogous to a person, if he loses a sela or a kilarin²²This was a valuable ornament of gold inlaid with a jewel. in his house, he will kindle several lamps, several wicks, until he finds them. The matter can be inferred a fortiori; if for these, that [enhance] the temporal life of this world, a person kindles several lamps and several wicks until he discovers them and finds them, matters of Torah, that [are essential for] life in this world and in the World to Come, do you not need to search for them like these hidden treasures? That is: “If you seek it like silver….” Rabbi Elazar said: In all my days, no one preceded me to the study hall and I did not leave a person there and exit. One time I awoke early and I found the collectors of manure and collectors of straw,²³These individuals would arise very early to collect straw and manure from public thoroughfares in order to sell them as fertilizer. They had begun their work before Rabbi Elazar had gone to the study hall. and I said: “If you seek it like silver and search for it like for hidden treasures, then you will understand fear of the Lord” (Proverbs 2:4–5). We are not even like the collectors of manure and collectors of straw. Thus we have learned that Rabbi Pinḥas ben Yair used to say: Alacrity leads to cleanliness. Cleanliness leads to purity. Purity leads to sanctity. Sanctity leads to humility. Humility leads to fear of sin. Fear of sin leads to piety. Piety leads to the Divine Spirit. The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead. The resurrection of the dead leads to Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory.
Alacrity leads to cleanliness, as it is stated: “He shall complete atoning²⁴The term kapara means atonement as well as cleanliness. This verse, which is about the service of the High Priest in the Temple on Yom Kippur, indicates that it is the completion of a service, which is accomplished through alacrity, that leads to atonement, or cleanliness. for the Sanctuary” (Leviticus 16:20). Cleanliness leads to purity, as it is stated: “The priest shall atone for her and she will be purified” (Leviticus 12:8). Purity leads to sanctity, as it is stated: “He shall purify it and he shall sanctify it” (Leviticus 16:19). Sanctity leads to humility, as it is stated: “For so said the Exalted and Most High, who abides forever and whose name is holy: Exalted and holy I will dwell and I will be with the downtrodden and lowly” (Isaiah 57:15). Humility leads to fear of sin, as it is stated: “In the wake of humility is fear of the Lord…” (Proverbs 22:4). Fear of sin leads to piety, as it is stated: “Then you spoke in a vision to your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20).²⁵Some suggest that the text here should read: “The mercy [ḥesed] of the Lord is forever and ever upon those who fear Him” (Psalms 103:17), in accordance with the parallel text of the Jerusalem Talmud (Shekalim 3:3). The term ḥesed, translated in the verse as mercy, is related to the term ḥasidut, piety (see Etz Yosef). Piety leads to the Divine Spirit, as it is stated: “Then you spoke in a vision to your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20). The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, as it is stated: “I will place My spirit in you, and you will live” (Ezekiel 37:14). The resurrection of the dead leads to Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory, as it is stated: “Behold, I am sending Elijah the prophet to you [before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord]” (Malachi 3:23).²⁶“The great and terrible day of the Lord” is understood as a reference to the resurrection of the dead. Elijah will come before the resurrection of the dead, but it is the need to perform the resurrection of the dead that leads to his coming (Etz Yosef).
Rabbi Matna said: What wisdom made as a crown on its head, humility made as a sandal on its heel. What wisdom made a crown on its head [roshah], as it is stated: “The beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord” (Psalms 111:10), humility made a sandal on its heel [akevah], as it is stated: “In the wake of [ekev] humility is fear of the Lord…” (Proverbs 22:4).
The resurrection of the dead is by means of Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory. That is what is written: “Then you will understand fear of the Lord, and you will find knowledge of ” (Proverbs 2:5), this is the Divine Spirit.²⁷Commentaries struggle to understand this line, which does not prove that resurrection of the dead is by means of Elijah. Some suggest that it be deleted (Etz Yosef). Others suggest that this is a proof that alacrity eventually leads to understanding via the Divine Spirit, as indicated above. This is because the verse that precedes the one cited here relates to alacrity (Midrash HaMevoar).
Rabbi Simon [said] in the name of Rabbi Ḥalafta: [This is analogous] to a royal adviser who grew prominent in the king’s palace. The king said to him: ‘Make a request; what shall I give you?’ The adviser said: If I request silver and gold, he will give them to me; gems and pearls, he will give them to me. He said: I will request the king’s daughter, and everything will be included. So too, “In Givon, the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream at night; God said: Request; what shall I give you?” (I Kings 3:5). Solomon said: If I request silver, gold, gems and pearls, he will give them to me. But I will request wisdom and everything will be included. That is what is written: “Give Your servant an attentive heart” (I Kings 3:9). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Solomon, you requested wisdom and you did not request wealth and property and the lives of your enemies. By your life, wisdom is granted you, and thereby, I will give you wealth and property.’ Immediately, “Solomon awakened and behold, a dream” (I Kings 3:15). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The dream was fulfilled; a donkey brayed and he knew what it was braying, a bird tweeted and he knew what it was tweeting. Immediately, “he came to Jerusalem and stood before the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord. He sacrificed burnt offerings, he performed peace offerings, and he made a feast for all his servants” (I Kings 3:15). Rabbi Elazar said: From here it is derived that one makes a feast upon completion of the Torah. Rabbi Yudan said: It is to teach you that anyone who teaches Torah in public is privileged to have the Divine Spirit rest upon him, as so Solomon did. He taught and the Divine Spirit rested upon him and he composed three books: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs.

(Fol. 19b) He wept, and they wept. He wept because he was suspected of being a Sadducee, and they wept because Resh Lakish said: "He who suspects an innocent man will receive odily punishment." And why did they go to such an extent? Because it was feared lest he prepare the incense on the censer outside of the Holy of Holies, and then enter with the censer, as did the Sadducees. Our Rabbis were taught: That it happened with one Sadducee, who prepared [the incense] outside, and entered the Holy of Holies with it, that when he came out, he was rejoicing greatly. When his father met him, he said to him: "My son, though we are Sadducees, yet we must fear the Pharisees." Whereupon he replied: "All my years I was anxious to fulfill the verse (Lev. 16, 2) For in the cloud will I appear upon the Kaporeth, and I said to myself, 'When will the day come in which I might do it?' And to-day, when I have had the opportunity, should I not have done it?" It was said that it did not take long before he died, and lay amidst rubbish, and worms crept out of his nostrils. And according to others, he was smitten right there, while leaving the Temple.

1) (Vayikra 16:1) ("And the L–rd spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron when they drew near before the L–rd and they died,") "And the L–rd spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron": What is the intent of this ("two")? Because it is written (Vayikra 10:1) "And the sons of Aaron took, Nadav and Avihu, each his coal-pan" — "the sons of Aaron" — they did not seek counsel from Aaron; "Nadav and Avihu" — they did not seek counsel from Moses; "each his coal-pan" — each by himself; they did not take counsel from each other. Whence is it derived that just as the transgression of the two was identical, so the death of the two was identical? From "after the death of the two sons of Aaron."

1) (Vayikra 16:5) ("And from the congregation of the children of Israel he shall take two he-goats for a sin-offering and one ram for a burnt-offering.") "And from the congregation of the children of Israel": They must be from (i.e., are funded by) the community. "he shall take two he-goats": The minimum of he-goats is two. Why, then, is it written "two"? That they be alike (in all respects). And whence is it derived that even if they are not alike, they are (nevertheless) valid? From "he-goat" (Vayikra 16:9); "he-goat" (Vayikra 16:10), (connoting de facto validity with) any he-goat.

1) (Vayikra 16:12) ("And he shall take a full coal-pan of coals of fire from off the altar before the L–rd and his full handfuls of spices ground small, and he shall bring them within the curtain."): "and he shall slaughter the bullock of the sin-offering which is his. And he shall take a full coal-pan, etc.": He gives it to another (Cohein) to stir its blood on the fourth level of the sanctuary, so that it does not congeal.

1) (Vayikra 16:15) ("And he shall slaughter the he-goat of the sin-offering which is the people's, and he shall bring its blood inside the curtain; and he shall do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and he shall sprinkle it upon the ark cover and before the ark cover."): "And he shall slaughter the he-goat of the sin-offering which is the people's": His fellow Cohanim are not to receive atonement through it. And through what is this atonement effected? Through the bullock of their brothers. I might think that their atonement is not effected through that of their brothers, it being written (Vayikra 16:6) ("the bullock) which is his" (Aaron's), which implies that they do not have atonement through it. But (Vayikra 16:33) "And for the Cohanim and for the entire people of the congregation he shall make atonement" indicates that they do have atonement. Through what, then, is this atonement effected? It is better that they have atonement through the bullock of their brother Cohanim — For we find that part of the criterion ("which is his" [i.e., Aaron's] Vayikra 16:6) was separated (from the literal "his"), finding as we do that (both) he and his family receive atonement through it — than that they receive atonement through the bullock of the congregation, where we find no such separation from the criterion. And, if you will, it may be derived thus (Vayikra 16:6) "And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his, and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household," and they (the Cohanim) are (part of) the household of Aaron, as it is written (Tehillim 235:19): "House of Aaron (i.e., the Cohanim) — Bless the L–rd!"

1) (Vayikra 16:16) ("And he shall make atonement for the holy place from the uncleanlinesses of the children of Israel, and from their offenses of all of their sins; and so shall he do for the tent of meeting that dwells with them in the midst of their uncleanlinesses.") "And he shall make atonement for the holy place from the uncleanlinesses of the children of Israel": Three "uncleanlinesses" may be adduced here: that of idolatry, viz. (Vayikra 20:3) ("for of his seed he has given to the Molech) to defile My Sanctuary and to profane My holy name"; that of illicit relations, viz. (Vayikra 18:30) "not to do in the manner of the abominations that were done before you, and you shall not become unclean in them"; that of bloodshed, viz. (Bamidbar 35:34) "And you shall not defile the land wherein you dwell, in whose midst I dwell."

1) (Vayikra 16:20) ("And when he has finished making atonement for the holy place, and the tent of meeting, and the altar, then he shall draw near the living he-goat.") "And when he has finished making atonement for the holy place": If he has made atonement, he has finished. These are the words of R. Akiva. R. Yehudah said to him: Why not say (as per the verse) "If he has finished, (including spilling out the left-over blood at the base of the altar), he has made atonement"? To teach that if one of the applications (of blood) were lacking, it is as if he has not made atonement. "And when he has finished making atonement for the holy place": This refers to (the sprinklings between the staves of the ark in) the holy of holies. "the tent of meeting": This refers to (the sprinklings on the curtain in) the sanctuary.

1) (Vayikra 5:5) ("Then it shall be, if he be guilty for one of these, then he shall confess upon it wherein he has sinned (Vayikra 5:6) And he shall bring his guilt-offering to the L–rd for his sin, etc.") "Then it shall be" — Immediately, what shall he do? "he shall bring" the offering (and then confess, even though in the verse "confess" appears before "bring.") Whence is it derived that he needs confession? From "then he shall confess." And whence is it derived that confession is over a living animal? It is written here "confess" and it is written there (Vayikra 16:21, in respect to the sent-away he-goat of Yom Kippur) "confess." Just as there, the confession is over a living animal, here, too, it is over a living animal.

1) From here they ruled: Wherever there is awareness in the beginning, awareness in the end, and hiddenness in the middle, there is oleh veyored ("sliding scale") liability. Where there is awareness in the beginning and not at the end, the he-goat (of Yom Kippur) which is presented within and Yom Kippur suspend (his judgment) until he becomes aware, whereupon he brings an oleh veyored offering.

1) (Midbar [desert] is mentioned three times in this section:) 15:10, Bamidbar 16:21, and Bamidbar 16:22 — to include (the [sending away to the] desert requirement for the sanctuaries of) Nov, Givon, Shiloh, and the Temple.

1) (Vayikra 16:26) ("And he who sends the he-goat to Azazel shall wash his clothes and bathe his flesh in water, and then he may come to the camp.") "And he who sends": not he who sends the sender (i.e., not those who accompany him). "And he who sends the he-goat to Azazel shall wash his clothes": I might think that his clothes become unclean as soon as he leaves the wall of the azarah (the Temple court). It is, therefore, written "to Azazel (he) shall wash his clothes." If "to Azazel (he shall wash his clothes," I might think that his clothes do not become unclean until he reached Tsok (the mountain from which the goat was precipitated). And he who sends the goat to Azazel shall wash his clothes." How (are these verses to be reconciled)? As soon as he leaves the wall of Jerusalem his clothes become unclean. These are the words of R. Yehudah.

1) (Vayikra 16:29) ("And it shall be to you an eternal statute: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict your souls. And all work you shall not do, the citizen and the stranger that sojourns in your midst.") "And it shall be to you" (for atonement): and not to idolators. "an eternal statute": for the eternal house (i.e., the Temple, to exclude sacrificial mounds, where those offerings are not sacrificed.) "in the seventh month": I might think all of it; it is, therefore, written "on the tenth day of the month." "you shall afflict your souls": I might think that one should sit in the sun or in the cold in order to afflict himself; it is, therefore, written, (following:) "And all work you shall not do." I have forbidden work to you in a different context (Shabbath), and I have forbidden (non-) affliction (by eating) in a different context. Just as the work that I forbade you in a different context is work which is liable to kareth (cutting off), so, the (non-) affliction that I forbade you in a different context is such that is liable to kareth.

1) (Vayikra 16:3) "With this shall Aaron come to the holy place: with a young bullock for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering." "With this": What is the intent of this? Because it is written "to the holy place … before the ark cover which is on the ark," I might think that this applies only to a holy place where there is an ark and an ark cover. Whence do I derive the same for a holy place where there is no ark and ark cover? From "With this shall Aaron come to the holy place" — to equate (for this purpose) a holy place where there is an ark and an ark cover to one where there is not.

1) (Vayikra 16:30) ("For on this day He shall atone for you to cleanse you of all of your sins; before the L–rd you shall be clean.") "For on this day He shall atone for you": by the offerings. And whence is it derived that even without offerings and without the he-goat, the day (itself) atones? From "For on this day He shall atone." For transgressions between man and G d Yom Kippur atones; for transgressions between man and his neighbor Yom Kippur does not atone until he conciliates his neighbor.

1) (Vayikra 16:15) ("And he shall slaughter the he-goat of the sin-offering which is the people's, and he shall bring its blood inside the curtain; and he shall do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and he shall sprinkle it upon the ark cover and before the ark cover."): "And he shall slaughter the he-goat of the sin-offering which is the people's": His fellow Cohanim are not to receive atonement through it. And through what is this atonement effected? Through the bullock of their brothers. I might think that their atonement is not effected through that of their brothers, it being written (Vayikra 16:6) ("the bullock) which is his" (Aaron's), which implies that they do not have atonement through it. But (Vayikra 16:33) "And for the Cohanim and for the entire people of the congregation he shall make atonement" indicates that they do have atonement. Through what, then, is this atonement effected? It is better that they have atonement through the bullock of their brother Cohanim — For we find that part of the criterion ("which is his" [i.e., Aaron's] Vayikra 16:6) was separated (from the literal "his"), finding as we do that (both) he and his family receive atonement through it — than that they receive atonement through the bullock of the congregation, where we find no such separation from the criterion. And, if you will, it may be derived thus (Vayikra 16:6) "And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his, and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household," and they (the Cohanim) are (part of) the household of Aaron, as it is written (Tehillim 235:19): "House of Aaron (i.e., the Cohanim) — Bless the L–rd!"

1) (Vayikra 16:5) ("And from the congregation of the children of Israel he shall take two he-goats for a sin-offering and one ram for a burnt-offering.") "And from the congregation of the children of Israel": They must be from (i.e., are funded by) the community. "he shall take two he-goats": The minimum of he-goats is two. Why, then, is it written "two"? That they be alike (in all respects). And whence is it derived that even if they are not alike, they are (nevertheless) valid? From "he-goat" (Vayikra 16:9); "he-goat" (Vayikra 16:10), (connoting de facto validity with) any he-goat.

1) (Vayikra 16:15) ("And he shall slaughter the he-goat of the sin-offering which is the people's, and he shall bring its blood inside the curtain; and he shall do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and he shall sprinkle it upon the ark cover and before the ark cover."): "And he shall slaughter the he-goat of the sin-offering which is the people's": His fellow Cohanim are not to receive atonement through it. And through what is this atonement effected? Through the bullock of their brothers. I might think that their atonement is not effected through that of their brothers, it being written (Vayikra 16:6) ("the bullock) which is his" (Aaron's), which implies that they do not have atonement through it. But (Vayikra 16:33) "And for the Cohanim and for the entire people of the congregation he shall make atonement" indicates that they do have atonement. Through what, then, is this atonement effected? It is better that they have atonement through the bullock of their brother Cohanim — For we find that part of the criterion ("which is his" [i.e., Aaron's] Vayikra 16:6) was separated (from the literal "his"), finding as we do that (both) he and his family receive atonement through it — than that they receive atonement through the bullock of the congregation, where we find no such separation from the criterion. And, if you will, it may be derived thus (Vayikra 16:6) "And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his, and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household," and they (the Cohanim) are (part of) the household of Aaron, as it is written (Tehillim 235:19): "House of Aaron (i.e., the Cohanim) — Bless the L–rd!"

1) (Vayikra 16:7) ("And he shall take the two he-goats and he shall stand them before the L–rd at the door of the tent of meeting.") "And he shall take the two he-goats": We are hereby taught that they are mutually exclusive. "before the L–rd at the door of the tent of meeting": They are stood at the east of the azarah to the north of the altar, their backs to the east and their faces to the west.

1) (Vayikra 16:5) ("And from the congregation of the children of Israel he shall take two he-goats for a sin-offering and one ram for a burnt-offering.") "And from the congregation of the children of Israel": They must be from (i.e., are funded by) the community. "he shall take two he-goats": The minimum of he-goats is two. Why, then, is it written "two"? That they be alike (in all respects). And whence is it derived that even if they are not alike, they are (nevertheless) valid? From "he-goat" (Vayikra 16:9); "he-goat" (Vayikra 16:10), (connoting de facto validity with) any he-goat.

[(Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.] R. Abba bar Kahana opened (with Eccl. 2:2): OF LAUGHTER I SAID: IT IS MAD! [AND OF REJOICING, WHAT DOES THAT DO?] How confused is the laughter of the peoples of the world,²Tanh., Lev. 6:1; Eccl. R. 2:2:1; PRK 26(27):2. which they produce in their theater³Gk.: theatra. [houses] and racing arenas.⁴Lat.: circi; cf. Gk.: kirkoi (“circles”). AND OF REJOICING, WHAT DOES THAT DO? What enjoyment would the disciples of the sages have there?⁵I.e., what confused, popular enjoyment can compare to the delights of Torah study?

Another matter: “Of laughter, I said it is confounded” – how confounded is the laughter that the attribute of justice laughed at Elisheva bat Aminadav. Elisheva bat Aminadav experienced four celebrations on one day: Moses, her brother-in-law, was king; Naḥshon, her brother, was the prince who was head of all the princes; Aaron, her husband, was the [High] Priest wearing the ephod stones; and her two sons were deputy High Priests. But when they entered [the Tabernacle] to burn incense without permission, they were burned and her celebration was transformed to mourning. That is, “and of joy, what does it accomplish,” as it is stated: “After the death of the two sons of Aaron…” (Leviticus 16:1).

“And did not remember His footstool [hadom raglav],” Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He does not remember that blood [hadam] that was between the legs of the elder, as it is stated: “Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised on the flesh of his foreskin” (Genesis 17:24). Rabbi Yudan said: [This is analogous] to a king who seized his enemies and killed them, and the residents of his province were dipping their feet in the blood of his enemies. One time, they provoked him and he expelled them from his palace. They said: ‘The king does not remember to our credit that blood in which we dipped our feet, the blood of his enemies.’ So too, Israel said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘You do not remember to our credit that blood that was in Egypt, as it is stated: “You shall take from the blood and you shall place it on the doorposts and on the lintel”’ (Exodus 12:7).
Alternatively, “and did not remember His footstool,” footstool is nothing other than the Temple. That is what is written: “Exalt the Lord our God and prostrate yourselves to His footstool; He is holy” (Psalms 99:5). “On the day of His wrath,” Rabbi Aḥa said: The wrath of the Holy One blessed be He was one day. Had Israel repented, they would have moderated it.
“He called in my ears with a loud voice, saying: Those appointed over the city, approach, each with his weapon of destruction in his hand” (Ezekiel 9:1). Until when is the sin of the calf in existence?¹²Until when will Israel be punished for the sin of the Golden Calf? Rabbi Berekhya, and some say Rabbi Neḥemya ben Elazar, [said]: Until the calves of Yerovam ben Nevat.¹³Until Yerovam constructed his calves (see I Kings 12:28). That is what is written: “When I will heal Israel, the iniquity of Ephraim and the evildoing of Samaria will be revealed” (Hosea 7:1). The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘I came to heal Israel of the sin of the calf, and the evils of Samaria were revealed.’ Rabbi Yishmael bar Naḥmani said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: Until the destruction of the Temple, as it is written: “Those appointed over the city [pekudot] approach, each with his weapon of destruction in his hand” (Ezekiel 9:1), and it is written: “And on the day of My reckoning, I will reckon [pakadti] their sin upon them” (Exodus 32:34).
It is written: “And behold, six men were coming from the way of the Upper Gate, which faces northward, each with his weapon of destruction in his hand, and one man in their midst was clad in linen, with a scribe's inkwell at his waist. They came and they stood beside the bronze altar” (Ezekiel 9:2). It says six here, but were there not five decrees? As it is written: “And to those He said in my earshot: Pass through the city behind him and smite; let your eye not pity and do not have compassion” (Ezekiel 9:5). And it is written: “Slay utterly the elderly, the youth, the young woman and the child, and the women” (Ezekiel 9:6).¹⁴The men referred to in Ezekiel 9:2 are angels of destruction, yet there are only five groups of people mentioned in the verse as slated for destruction, so five angels should have sufficed. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He spoke to the most severe angel in their midst, this is Gavriel, as it is stated: “And one man in their midst was clad in linen, with a scribe's inkwell at his waist” (Ezekiel 9:2).¹⁵This angel was one of the six, but it did not actually carry out the destruction.
That angel served in three capacities: Scribe, executioner, and a High Priest. A scribe as it is written: “With a scribe's inkwell at his waist.” An executioner, as it is stated: “He destroyed them, delivered them to slaughter.” (Isaiah 34:2).¹⁶The verse ascribes this destruction and slaughter to “rage [ketzef],” which is identified as Gavriel (see Shabbat 55a). This destruction took place at a different time than that described in Ezekiel chap. 9. High Priest, as it is stated: “And one man in their midst was clad in linen,” and it is written regarding a priest: “He shall don a sacred linen tunic” (Leviticus 16:4).
“Each with his weapon of destruction [mapatzo] in his hand” (Ezekiel 9:1), his weapons, his razing equipment, and his equipment for causing exile. His weapons, “each with his weapon of destruction in his hand,” his razing equipment, “As he renders all the altar stones like shattered limestone” (Isaiah 27:9), his equipment for causing exile, as it is written: “You are a weapon of destruction [mapetz]¹⁷This word is related to the word lehafitz, which connotes scattering and dispersal. for Me, weapons of war” (Jeremiah 51:20).
And it is written: “They came and they stood beside the bronze altar” (Ezekiel 9:2). Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: Until the place of its boundary.¹⁸The altar in the courtyard of the Temple was stone, not bronze (see Shabbat 55a and Rashi ad loc.), but it served the same functions as the bronze altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle. One of its functions was to serve as a boundary beyond which non-priests were not permitted to go. The angels described in this verse were also not permitted to go past this demarcation point. The Rabbis say: They stand and call attention the sins of Aḥaz, in whose regard it is written: “The bronze altar will be for me to visit” (II Kings 16:15). What is to visit [levaker]? Rabbi Pinḥas said: He disqualified it and rendered it blemished,¹⁹It was as though all the animals sacrificed on it were blemished. just as it says: “The priest shall not deem impure [yevaker]” (Leviticus 13:36). “The Lord said to him [elav]: Pass through the midst of the city…Jerusalem” (Ezekiel 9:4). Elo is written.²⁰The word elav is written without a yod, such that it can be read elo, which means his powerful one. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: to the most severe angel among them, .
“You shall set a mark [tav] [upon the foreheads of the men…]” (Ezekiel 9:4). Rav Naḥman said: These are the people who fulfilled the Torah from alef through tav.²¹The tav was made on the foreheads of the righteous. The Rabbis say: [It connoted] disintegration and dissolution.²²The tav was made on the heads of the wicked. Rav said: A tav was placed because it connotes either side: Desolation, desolation [tihi] and live, live [teḥi].²³A tav was marked on the foreheads of both the righteous and the wicked, but it connoted different things for different people. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Yitzḥak said: The merit of their ancestors has concluded [tama].
Rabbi Hoshaya sent [a message] to Rabbi Simon, saying: ‘Since you are situated in the household of the Exilarch, why do you not rebuke them?’ He said to him: ‘If only we may be among those of whom it is written, “[the men] that sigh and that cry [for all the abominations that are done in its midst”’ (Ezekiel 9:4).²⁴It is enough for us to be pained at the sin of others, even if we do not rebuke them, and then we will be like those mentioned in the verse in Ezekiel, who were marked for life while the sinners were marked for death. He said to him: ‘But was it not from them that the calamity began? As it is written: “And to those He said in my earshot: [Pass through the city behind him and smite; let your eye not pity and do not have compassion]”’ (Ezekiel 9:5).
Rabbi Elazar said: The Holy One blessed be He never associates His name with evil, but rather with good. That is what is written [in this verse]. And to those God said in my earshot is not written here, but rather: “And to those He said in my earshot: Pass through the city behind him and smite; let your eye not pity and do not have compassion.”²⁵The verse uses the pronoun rather than explicitly mentioning God so that His name not be directly associated with destruction. “The elderly, the youth and the maiden, the children and the women you shall kill for destruction, but do not approach any man upon whom is the sign; begin from My Temple” (Ezekiel 9:6). How is it so?²⁶The verse states that the angels were not to kill any man with a sign, indicating that the righteous would be spared, but then states that the destruction was to begin at the Temple, where there were presumably righteous individuals. At that moment, prosecution sprung before the Throne of Glory. It said before Him: ‘Master of the universe: Which of them was killed for the sake of Your name? Which of them had his brain pierced for the sake of Your name? Which of them gave his life for the sake of Your name?’²⁷The heavenly prosecutor argued that the people had not suffered in God’s name and therefore were not really righteous. He said: ‘They do not warrant a writ of condemnation.’ Rabbi Aivu said: The Holy One blessed be He said: ‘Let My Temple be destroyed but let no hand touch the righteous.’²⁸The righteous were to be spared but the Temple itself was to be destroyed . Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: It and they warrant a writ of condemnation.²⁹According to this view, God accepted the argument of the prosecutor and ruled that both the Temple and the righteous would be destroyed.
Rabbi Tanḥuma and Rabbi Abba [said] in the name of Rabbi Abba:³⁰The reference is to two different scholars by the name of Rabbi Abba. The Holy One blessed be He never said a positive statement and recanted, but here He recanted. That is what is written: “Begin with My Temple” (Ezekiel 9:6). Do not read it as My Temple [mikdashi], but rather as My holy ones [mekudashai]: “Begin with My holy ones.” Immediately, what is written: “It was as they were smiting, and I remained and I fell upon my face, and I cried out and said: Alas, Lord God, are You destroying the entire remnant of Israel?” (Ezekiel 9:8). “Remnant” is nothing other than the righteous; therefore he comes and says: “The Lord demolished and had no compassion.”

Another interpretation (of Eccl. 2:2): OF LAUGHTER I SAID: IT IS MAD! R. Pinhas said: How confused was the laughter, when Divine Justice laughed over Elisheba bat Amminadab,¹¹Aaron’s wife and Naashon’s sister according to Exod. 6:23. when she saw four joys in one day.¹²Above, Tanh. (Buber), Lev. 3:3; Lev. R. 20:2; Eccl. R. 2:2:2. She saw her brother-in-law (Moses) a king, her husband a high priest, her brother (Naashon) a prince (nasi),¹³Naashon is here being identified with Nahshon ben Amminadab, whom Numb. 2:3; 7:11f.; and I Chron. 2:10 call a prince (nasi). and her two sons deputy high priests. When they went in to offer sacrifice, they came out destroyed by fire; and her joy turned into sorrow. [This is what is written (in Lev. 16:1): NOW THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.]

2) "when they drew near before the L–rd and they died": R. Yossi Haglili says: They died because of the drawing near (and entering the holy of holies without permission), and not because of the incense offering. R. Akiva says: They died because of the offering and not because of the drawing near. One verse (our verse) states "when they drew near before the L–rd and they died," and another verse states (Vayikra 11:1) "and they offered before the L–rd a strange fire." The resolution (Bamidbar 3:4) "when they drew near (with) a strange fire before the L–rd" — They died because of the drawing near and not because of the offering. R. Elazar b. Azaryah says: The offering is sufficient (for death) unto itself, and the drawing near is sufficient unto itself.

2) "and one ram for a burnt-offering": Rebbi said: The "one ram" mentioned here is the same as that mentioned in Bamidbar (Bamidbar 29:9). R. Elazar b. R. Shimon says: They are two rams, one mentioned here, and one in Bamidbar. (Vayikra 16:6) "And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his.": He shall not bring it from community (funds). I might think that he does not bring it from the community because it does not atone for the community, but that he may bring it from his fellow Cohanim, whom it does atone for. It is, therefore, written again "which is his" (Vayikra 16:11). I might think he should not bring it ab initio, but if he did, it is valid. It is, therefore, written again (Vayikra 16:11) "which is his." (Vayikra 16:6) "and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household. This is verbal atonement. But perhaps (it is speaking of) atonement through (the sprinkling of) the blood. (This cannot be, for) it "atonement" is written here, and it is written in respect to the (sent-away) he-goat. Just as the "atonement" there is verbal confession, so the "atonement" of the bullock is verbal.

2) Every day he would scoop out (the coals) with a silver (shovel) and empty them into one of gold, and on this day (Yom Kippur) he would scoop them out with a gold one and with it would bring them (to the inner altar). Every day he would scoop them out with (a shovel of) four kabim and empty them into (one of) three kabim. On this day he would scoop them out with one of three kabim and with it would bring them (to the inner altar).

2) "and he shall bring its blood inside the curtain": We are hereby taught that he enters with it into the holy of holies. This tells me (that he does so) only with the blood of the he-goat. Whence is the same derived for the blood of the bullock? From "and he shall do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bullock." — Just as he enters into the holy of holies with the blood of the he-goat, so he enters into it with the blood of the bullock.

2) I might think that the he-goat atones for all of these defilements; it is, therefore, written "from the uncleanlinesses," and not all the uncleanlinesses. Which tumah do we find Scripture to have distinguished from all other uncleanlinesses (by making it subject to an oleh veyored [sliding scale] offering)? That of defiling the sanctuary and its consecrated objects; here, too, we adduce only that of defiling the sanctuary and its consecrated objects. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon said: It may be adduced from its very context, viz. "And he shall make atonement for the holy place from the uncleanlinesses of the children of Israel" — from the defilements of the sanctuary.

2) Whence is it derived that (the confession) requires placing of the hands (semichah, upon the head of the animal)? "upon it" is written here and "upon it" is written there (Vayikra 16:2). Just as there semichah is required, here, too, semichah is required.

2) From here they ruled: If he made part of the applications within and the blood spilled, he brings other blood and begins again with the applications within. R. Elazar and R. Shimon said: He starts only from where he left off. If he finished the applications within and the blood spilled, he brings other blood and begins again with the outer applications. If he made part of the (outer) applications and the blood spilled, he brings other blood and begins again with the outer applications. R. Elazar and R. Shimon say: He starts only from where he left off. If he finished the outer applications and the blood spilled, he brings other blood and begins with the altar applications. If he made part of the altar applications and the blood spilled, he brings other blood and begins again with the altar applications. R. Elazar and R. Shimon say: He starts only from where he left off.

2) If there were no awareness in the beginning, but there was awareness in the end, the kid presented outside (on the outer altar) and Yom Kippur atone, it being written (Bamidbar 29:11) "aside from the offering of atonement." Whatever the latter atones for, the former atones for. Just as the inner (altar sacrifice) atones only where there was awareness, so the outer (altar sacrifice) atones only where there was awareness.

2) (Vayikra 16:23) ("Then Aaron shall come to the tent of meeting, and he shall take off the linen garments which he put on when he went into the holy place, and he shall leave them there.") "Then Aaron shall come to the tent of meeting": The entire section is stated according to the order (of the service of the high-priest) except for this verse. And why did he come there? To remove the incense ladle and the coal pan.

2) R. Yossi says: "to Azazel (he) shall wash his clothes": His clothes do not become tamei until he reaches Tsok. R. Shimon says: He who sends the he-goat to Azazel shall wash his clothes": He thrusts it headlong (down the mountain) and his clothes become tamei.

2) And these are (the eating of) nothar (portions of sacrifices "left over" beyond the permitted eating time) and (the eating of) piggul (sacrifices invalidated by improper intent of the officiating Cohein). Whence is (the eating of) tevel (untithed produce) to be derived? From "shall you afflict your souls," this ("your souls") serving as an inclusion.

2) You say that the intent of "to the holy place" is to render a holy place that is not like this (i.e., one that is without ark and ark cover fit for a bullock like this.) But perhaps its intent is rather to render a bullock that is not like this fit for this holy place. And which is that (bullock?) That which is offered for all of the mitzvoth.

2) Thus did R. Elazar b. Azaryah expound: "Of all of your sins before the L–rd you shall be clean": For things between yourself and G d you are pardoned. For things between yourself and your neighbor you are not pardoned until you conciliate your neighbor.

2) R. Shimon says: From "bad" I already know that the four garments (of the high-priest) are subsumed, it being written (Vayikra 16:32): "And he (the high-priest) shall put on the linen garments, the holy garments." If so, why is "middo bad" needed? For kemidatho ("fit to size").

2) "… from his sons shall offer it": We are hereby taught that his son takes precedence to all others. I might think that this is so even when he cannot fill his father's place (in wisdom and in fear of Heaven). It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 16:32): "… who shall fill his place": When he is qualified to fill his father's place, he takes precedence to all others. If he is not qualified to do so, let another come and serve in his stead.

2) "and one ram for a burnt-offering": Rebbi said: The "one ram" mentioned here is the same as that mentioned in Bamidbar (Bamidbar 29:9). R. Elazar b. R. Shimon says: They are two rams, one mentioned here, and one in Bamidbar. (Vayikra 16:6) "And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his.": He shall not bring it from community (funds). I might think that he does not bring it from the community because it does not atone for the community, but that he may bring it from his fellow Cohanim, whom it does atone for. It is, therefore, written again "which is his" (Vayikra 16:11). I might think he should not bring it ab initio, but if he did, it is valid. It is, therefore, written again (Vayikra 16:11) "which is his." (Vayikra 16:6) "and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household. This is verbal atonement. But perhaps (it is speaking of) atonement through (the sprinkling of) the blood. (This cannot be, for) it "atonement" is written here, and it is written in respect to the (sent-away) he-goat. Just as the "atonement" there is verbal confession, so the "atonement" of the bullock is verbal.

2) "and one ram for a burnt-offering": Rebbi said: The "one ram" mentioned here is the same as that mentioned in Bamidbar (Bamidbar 29:9). R. Elazar b. R. Shimon says: They are two rams, one mentioned here, and one in Bamidbar. (Vayikra 16:6) "And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his.": He shall not bring it from community (funds). I might think that he does not bring it from the community because it does not atone for the community, but that he may bring it from his fellow Cohanim, whom it does atone for. It is, therefore, written again "which is his" (Vayikra 16:11). I might think he should not bring it ab initio, but if he did, it is valid. It is, therefore, written again (Vayikra 16:11) "which is his." (Vayikra 16:6) "and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household. This is verbal atonement. But perhaps (it is speaking of) atonement through (the sprinkling of) the blood. (This cannot be, for) it "atonement" is written here, and it is written in respect to the (sent-away) he-goat. Just as the "atonement" there is verbal confession, so the "atonement" of the bullock is verbal.

2) (Vayikra 16:8) ("And Aaron shall place on the two he-goats lots, one lot for the L–rd, and the other lot for Azazel." "And Aaron shall place on the two he-goats lots": lots of any substance. I might think two on this and two on the other; it is, therefore, written "a lot for the L–rd and a lot for Azazel." I might think "for the L–rd and for Azazel" on this, and "for the L–rd and for Azazel" on the other; it is, therefore, written "one lot for the L–rd and one lot for Azazel." There is only one for Azazel.

(Lev. 16:1:) NOW THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES AFTER THE DEATH < OF AARON'S TWO SONS >. This text is related (to Ps. 75:5 [4]): I SAY TO THE MERRYMAKERS (la-holelim): DO NOT MAKE MERRY…. < La-holelim means > "to those who create confusion (la-ma'arbavya')."¹⁴Tanh., Lev. 6:2; PRK 26(27):3; Lev. R. 20:2. These are the ones whose heart is full of evil intrigues (holhaliyot).¹⁵Although the main text reads holhaliyot, Buber cites the word in his notes as the more traditional halholiyot. In either case, whatever the spelling, the midrash interprets holelim and holhaliyot as coming from the same root. R. Levi called them "Woe-makers."¹⁶Dehonayya’ [zehonayya’]. The word seems coined as a pun on “merrymakers” (holelim). See Jastrow, p. 373, s.v., WYNY’. These are the < MERRYMAKERS (holelim) > who bring woe (alelay) into the world. (Ps. 75:5 [4], cont.:) TO THE WICKED, DO NOT LIFT UP THE HORN. The righteous have not been happy in my world, so would you seek to be happy in my world? [The first Adam was not happy in my world, so would you seek to be happy in my world?] R. Levi said in the name of R. Simeon [ben Menasya]: The round of the first Adam's heel outshone¹⁷Literally: Made dim < by comparison >. the sphere of the sun.¹⁸PRK 4:4; 12:1; 26(27):3; PR 14:10; as well as Tanh., Lev. 6:2; Lev. R. 20:2. [And do not be surprised at this. According to universal custom, when a person makes two small plates,¹⁹Gk.: diskarion. one for himself and one for his household, whose does he make the more beautiful? Is it not his own? So the first Adam was created for the service of the Holy One, but the sphere of the sun was created for the service of mortals. Is it not all the more certain that the round of the first Adam's heel outshone the sphere of the sun?] Now if the round of Adam's heel outshone < it >, how much the more < must > the countenance²⁰Gk.: charakter; or possibly krystallos; Lat. crystallum. of his face < have outshone it >. R. Levi said in the name of R. Hama bar Hanina: The Holy One set up thirteen canopies for the first Adam in the Garden of Eden, as stated (in Ezek. 28:13): YOU WERE IN EDEN, THE GARDEN OF GOD, EVERY PRECIOUS STONE WAS YOUR COVERING. Then after all this glory, < he was told > (in Gen. 3:19): FOR DUST YOU ARE AND UNTO DUST YOU SHALL RETURN. Abraham was not happy in my world, so would you seek to be happy in my world? Abraham had a son born to him at the end of a hundred years. Then the Holy One said to him (in Gen. 22:2): PLEASE TAKE YOUR SON, YOUR ONLY SON. So he journeyed, as written (in vs. 4): AND ON THE THIRD DAY [ABRAHAM LIFTED HIS EYES] AND SAW. What did he see? He saw a cloud joined to the mountain. He said to his son: My son, what do you see?²¹See above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 4:46, and the note there. He said to him: I see a beautiful mountain with a cloud joined to it. He said to his lads: Do you see anything? They said to him: We see a mountain and a hill. He said to them (in vs. 5): STAY HERE WITH ('M) THE DONKEY, < i.e., STAY HERE, YOU > PEOPLE ('M) WHO ARE LIKE THE DONKEY.²²So Yev. 62a; Ket. 111a; Qid. 104a; BQ 49a; Nid. 17a; Eccl. R. 9:7:1; PRE 31. See also Gen. R. 56:2; PR 40:6. He took his son Isaac and went up to the top of the mountain. Then he built the altar, arranged the wood, bound him upon the altar, and took the knife. If the Angel had not said to him (in vs. 12): DO NOT RAISE [YOUR HAND AGAINST THE LAD], he would have already been slaughtered. When he came to his mother, she said to him: What did your father do to you. He told her: Daddy took me, brought me up mountains, brought me down valleys, brought me up to the top of a particular mountain, and built an altar. So he told the whole story. If the Angel had not said to him (in Gen. 22:12): DO NOT RAISE [YOUR HAND AGAINST THE LAD], I would have already been slaughtered. She said to him: Woe (vay) to you, < my > poor son! If < the angel > had not said to him (in vs. 12): DO NOT RAISE < YOUR HAND >, you would have already been slaughtered! She did not succeed in finishing the sentence before her breath departed from her. It is so stated (in Gen. 23:2): AND ABRAHAM PROCEEDED TO MOURN FOR SARAH AND WEEP FOR HER. From where had he < just > come? He had < just > come from Mount Moriah.²³Eccl. R. 9:7:2.

R. Judan of Gallia opened (with Job 39:27), “Is it at your command that the eagle mounts up and makes its nest on high?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Aaron. “At your command I had my Divine Presence rest upon the ark.²⁴Lev. R. 20:4; PRK 26(27):4; see PR 47:3. [Was it not] at your command that I removed my Divine Presence that was upon the ark?” In the case of the first Temple (according to Job 39:28), “It dwells and lodges on the rock,” [i.e., the Divine Presence was there for] a lodging of one night. In the case of the second Temple (referred to in ibid., cont.), “on a rocky crag²⁵Literally: ROCKY TOOTH. The midrash finds the expression well suited to the spur of rock on the Temple mount. and a stronghold,” [ i.e., the Divine Presence was there for a lodging of many nights.²⁶Here following the Buber text, even thought the number of nights that the Divine Presence lodged in the two Temples is the reverse of what one would expect. However, the Buber text is supported by the unemended, traditional text of Lev. R. 20:4 and in Yalqut Shim‘oni, Job 926. Moreover,] we learn there (in Yoma 5:2), “When the ark had been taken away, there was a certain stone there from the days of the former prophets,²⁷According to Rav Huna, as cited in Sot. 48b, the former prophets are David, Samuel, and Solomon. and it was named Foundation. And why was it named Foundation? Because out of it the world was founded.”²⁸Yoma 54b (bar.); yYoma 5:4 (42c); TYoma 3:6 (2:14); Numb. R. 12:4; see below, Tanh. 7:10. And how would a high priest pray on the Day of Atonement?²⁹Cf. yYoma 5:3 (42c). A version of this prayer is part of a long piyyut composed by Rabbi Meshullam ben Kalonymus in the tenth century. It is known either as the Avodah or by its initial words, Amits Koah, and appears as part of the Musaf Service on the Day of Atonement. See P. Birnbaum, The High Holyday Prayer Book (New York: Hebrew Publishing Co., 1951), p. 26. May it be Your will, O Lord our God, that this year be one of rain, warmth, and dew, a year of low prices, a year of abundance, a year of grace, a year of blessing, a year of trade, a year when Your people Israel are not dependent on each other, a year when they will not be arrogant with each other. Now the rabbis of Caesarea said, “[It was] with reference to our brothers in Caesarea [that the high priest prayed] for them not to be arrogant with each other.” But [the rabbis of the south] say, “[It was] with reference to our brothers in the Sharon, lest their houses become their tombs.”³⁰For example, if the houses collapsed from heavy rains or were buried in a sandstorm. (Job 39:29:) “From there it³¹I.e., the eagle. spies out food; and its eyes behold it from afar.” From there it prepares food for all the days of the year. He (i.e., the high priest) knew from the beginning of the year what would [happen] at the end [of the year]. How so? When he looked and saw smoke from the pile (of wood on the Temple altar)³²See TYoma 3:3 (2:11); Yoma 33a. rising southward, he knew that one would have enough in the south. And it was the same for the north, the same for the west, and the same for the east. But when the smoke rose straight up towards the sky, he knew that the whole world would have enough. Then after all this advantage, (according to Job 39:30) “Its nestlings suck (from 'l') up blood…. [Aaron] saw his nestlings wallowing (from g'g') in blood and (according to Lev. 10:3) kept silent. However (ibid., cont.), “where the slain (i.e. Nadab and Abihu) are, there (i.e. there is the Divine Presence) is.” R. Judan said in the name of R. Joshua ben Levi, [who spoke] in the name of R. Berekhyah, [who spoke] in the name of R. Hiyya bar Abba, “It is not written here (Lev. 10:4), ‘Draw near and carry your brothers away ‘from the sanctuary,’ but ‘from before the sanctuary.’ [The situation is] similar to someone who says to his colleague, ‘Remove the dead person from before his father. How long shall he look at his dead child?’” It is therefore written (in Lev. 16:1), “after the death of Aaron's two sons.”

(Lev. 14:2:) “In the day of his cleansing.” [With what?]²⁰Lev. R. 16:7. With (according to vs. 4) “two live clean birds.” How is his offering different from all [other] offerings? It is simply that he has spoken slander. Therefore, the text says that his sacrifice is two birds, because they (like slanderers) carry their voices. (Lev. 14:4, cont.:) “And cedar wood.” In the case of the cedar, no tree is taller (gevoha) than that one; so because [the leper] has exalted (gevoha) himself like a cedar, [he has had] the leprosy come upon him.²¹PRK 4:3. Thus Simeon ben Eleazar has said, “Leprosy comes on account of haughtiness, for so you find in the case of Uzziah (in II Chron. 26:16), ‘But when he was strong, he grew so arrogant that he acted corruptly,’ and it is written (in II Chron. 26:19), ‘but during his anger with the priests, leprosy appeared on his forehead.’” (Lev. 14:4, cont.:) “And with hyssop.” Among the trees there is none [as short] as the hyssop. Because [the leper] has lowered himself, [leprosy] is therefore cured through the hyssop. (Lev. 14:5:) “[Then the priest shall give a command] to kill one bird.” Why kill one and release one? It is simply that, if he has repented, the leprosy shall not return upon him.²²Cf. Lev. 16:9. (Lev. 14:2:) “[This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing:] He shall be brought unto the priest.” What is the meaning of “He shall be brought (rt.: bw')?” He comes (rt.: bw'). Why? Because everything is far off and separated from him, for so David says (in Ps. 38:12), “My friends and companions stand aloof from my affliction, and my kinfolk stand far off.” So also it says (in Lev. 13:46), “he shall dwell alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp,” outside the camp of Israel. It is therefore stated (in Lev. 14:2), “he shall be brought (rt.: bw'),” [meaning] he comes (rt.: bw').

(Fol. 36b) Our Rabbis were taught: How did the High-priest confess? "I have committed iniquities, transgressed, and sinned;" and so says Scripture regarding the scapegoat (Lev. 16, 21) And confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, and all their sins. And this arrangement is also used by Moses (Ex. 34, 7) Forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; so says R. Meir. The sages, however, say. Iniquities (Avonoth) refers to intentional transgressions; and so says Scripture (Num. 15, 31) That person shall be cut off, his iniquity (Avono) is upon him; transgressions (P'sha'im) refers to rebellion, and so says Scripture (II Kings 3, 7) The King of Moab hath rebelled (Pasha) against me. There is also another passage (Ib. 8, 22) Then did Libnah revolt in that time; sin (Chata'oth) refers to unintentional wrong (done in ignorance), and so says Scripture (Lev. 4, 2) If any person sin through ignorance (Yekheta). But, according to the sages, how is it possible that after he has confessed the intentional and rebellious sins, he will confess the unintentional? Therefore we must say that he said them in this order: I have sinned, committed iniquities, and transgressed. And so says David (Ps. 106, 6) We have sinned together with our fathers, ive have committed iniquity, we have done wickedly. And so also says Solomon (I Kings 8, 47; II Chr. 6) We have sinned, we have committed iniquity, we have acted wickedly. So also says Daniel (Dan. 9, 5) We have sinned, we have committed iniquity, we have done wickedly, and we have rebelled. If so, then, why did Moses say (Ex. 34, 6) Forgiving iniquity, and transgression, and sin. Moses said thus to the Holy One, praised be He! "Sovereign of the Universe, when the children of Israel will sin before thee, and then repent, consider their conscious sins as mere inadvertant acts."

3) "and he shall sprinkle it upon the ark cover": We are hereby taught that he applies one above (i.e., upon the ark cover). "and before the ark cover": I would not know how many. (But) I derive it as follows: Application of the blood below is mentioned in respect to the bullock, and application of the blood below is mentioned in respect to the he-goat. Just as with the first there are seven (applications), so, with the second.

3) I might think (that this he-goat atones) for all defilements of the sanctuary; it is, therefore, written "their offenses (pisheihem) — these are sins of rebellion (i.e., deliberate sins, as in II Kings 3:7) "The king of Moav pasha against me," and (II Kings 8:22) "Then tifsha Livnah at that time") and sins like peshaim, that are not subject to an offering.

3) (Vayikra 16:2) ("And the L–rd said to Moses: Speak to Aaron your brother, and let him not come at all times to the holy place within the curtain before the ark-cover which is on the ark, that he not die. For in the cloud I shall appear upon the ark cover.") "And the L–rd said to Moses: Speak to Aaron your brother, and let him not come at all times": — But we do not know what was said to him the first time (i.e., after 16:1 "And the L–rd spoke to Moses, etc.")! R. Elazar b. Azaryah was wont to say: To what may this be compared? To a patient who visited a doctor and was told by him: "Do not drink cold and do not lie in wet," after which a different doctor said to him: "Do not drink cold and do not lie in wet, so that you do not die as so and so died." The latter directive is the most effective. This is the thrust of "after the death of the two sons of Aaron… And the L–rd said to Moses: 'Speak to Aaron your brother and let him not come at all times,'"

3) If he finished the altar applications and the blood spilled, then (failure to) spill out the remaining blood at the base of the altar does not impede (the atonement). And all of them (i.e., all bullocks that were slaughtered to replace blood that was spilled) confer tumah upon the garments (of those who burned them), and they (the bullocks) are burned in the Bet Hadeshen (viz. Vayikra 16:28). These are the words of R. Elazar. R. Shimon and R. Meir say: The only one which confers tumah upon garments and is burned in the Bet Hadeshen is the last one, which consummates the atonement. "and then he shall draw near the living he-goat": Up to this point (for the atonement to "take") it must be alive.

3) And where there is no awareness, neither in the beginning nor in the end, the kids of the festivals and the kids of Rosh Chodesh atone. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon says: The kids of the festivals atone, but not the Rosh Chodesh kids. And for what do the kids of Rosh Chodesh atone? For a tahor eating (unwitting) something unclean. R. Meir says: The atonement of all the kids is the same, (all atoning for) defiling the sanctuary and its holy orders.

3) R. Yehudah said: Whence are derived the five immersions and the ten lustrations (washing of hands and feet) that the high-priest performs on that day? From (Vayikra 16:23) "Then Aaron shall come to the tent of meeting, and he shall take off the linen garments which he put on when he went into the holy place … (Vayikra 16:24) And he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place, and he shall put on his (eight everyday) garments." From here we derive that all transitions from one service to another requires immersion — whence we derive that he performed five immersions and ten lustrations on that day.

3) R. Yehudah said: Whence are derived the five immersions and the ten lustrations (washing of hands and feet) that the high-priest performs on that day? From (Vayikra 16:23) "Then Aaron shall come to the tent of meeting, and he shall take off the linen garments which he put on when he went into the holy place … (Vayikra 16:24) And he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place, and he shall put on his (eight everyday) garments." From here we derive that all transitions from one service to another requires immersion — whence we derive that he performed five immersions and ten lustrations on that day.

3) "he shall wash his clothes and bathe his flesh in water": I might think that it is a decree of the King (that he must immerse, just as the high-priest does); it is, therefore, written "and then he may come to the camp." Just as "and then he may come to the camp" there (in respect to the red heifer [Bamidbar 19:7]) (means that he may immerse) to free himself of tumah; here, too, (it means) to free himself of tumah, (but if he wishes to prolong his state of tumah, he need not immerse.)

3) If he finished the altar applications and the blood spilled, then (failure to) spill out the remaining blood at the base of the altar does not impede (the atonement). And all of them (i.e., all bullocks that were slaughtered to replace blood that was spilled) confer tumah upon the garments (of those who burned them), and they (the bullocks) are burned in the Bet Hadeshen (viz. Vayikra 16:28). These are the words of R. Elazar. R. Shimon and R. Meir say: The only one which confers tumah upon garments and is burned in the Bet Hadeshen is the last one, which consummates the atonement. "and then he shall draw near the living he-goat": Up to this point (for the atonement to "take") it must be alive.

3) I would then include tevel, which is subject to the death penalty; but I would not include neveilah (carcass), which is not subject to the death penalty; it is, therefore, written (in several places) "you shall afflict your souls" to include (all these). I would include neveilah, which is subject to a negative commandment, but I would not include chullin (mundane food), which is not subject to a negative commandment; it is, therefore, written (in several places) "you shall afflict your souls" (to include (all these). I would include chullin, which is not subject to a positive commandment, but I would not include terumah and second-tithe, which are (in some instances) subject to a positive commandment (e.g., in respect to Cohanim). It is, therefore, written "you shall afflict your souls," for inclusion. I would include terumah and second-tithe, which are not subject to "And you shall not leave over" (Vayikra 22:30); but I would not include consecrated food, which is subject to it; it is, therefore, written "you shall afflict your souls," for inclusion. Variantly: "You shall afflict your souls" — affliction which affects (the preservation of) your souls. Which is that? (Abstention from) eating and drinking.

3) And would this not follow a fortiori (that he should enter the holy of holies with the blood of this bullock all the days of the year?) viz.: If for the possible (defilement of the sanctuary and its sacred things on the part of the Cohanim) the high-priest enters the holy of holies with his bullock (on Yom Kippur), how much more so should he do so (all the days of the year) for known (transgression) of all of the mitzvoth! It is, therefore, written "With this (Yom Kippur bullock) shall Aaron come to the holy place," to exclude the bullock which is brought for (known transgression of) all of the mitzvoth, that he not enter with it to the holy of holies.

3) And whence is it derived that eating, drinking, bathing, anointment, shodding, and cohabitation are forbidden on Yom Kippur? From "shabbaton shvuth." I might then think that all of these are forbidden on the Sabbath of creation (i.e., an ordinary Sabbath). It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 16:31) "Sabbath shabbaton is it" (Yom Kippur). It is forbidden in all of them, but not the Sabbath of creation.

3) And whence is it derived that eating, drinking, bathing, anointment, shodding, and cohabitation are forbidden on Yom Kippur? From "shabbaton shvuth." I might then think that all of these are forbidden on the Sabbath of creation (i.e., an ordinary Sabbath). It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 16:31) "Sabbath shabbaton is it" (Yom Kippur). It is forbidden in all of them, but not the Sabbath of creation.

3) "and linen breeches shall he put upon his flesh": and not a plaster (intervening) on his flesh. The intent of "linen breeches shall there be upon his flesh," stated elsewhere (Vayikra 16:4) is that nothing is to be put on before the breeches.

3) Or, if you wish, this can be derived from "And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his, and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household" — and the bullock has not yet been slaughtered. (It is obvious, then, that verbal atonement is intended.)

3) If so, why is "lots" written? That they both be alike: That one not be large, and the other small; one of silver and the other of gold; one of marble and the other of box-wood.

[(Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.] R. Judan of Gallia opened (with Job 39:27): IS IT AT YOUR COMMAND THAT THE EAGLE MOUNTS UP AND MAKES ITS NEST ON HIGH? The Holy One said to Aaron: At your command [I had my Divine Presence rest upon the Ark.²⁵Tanh., Lev. 6:3; Lev. R. 20:4; PRK 26(27):4; see PR 47:3. Was it not at your command that I] removed my Divine Presence that was upon the Ark? In the case of the first temple (according to Job 39:28): IT DWELLS AND LODGES ON THE ROCK, < i.e., the Divine Presence was there for > a lodging of one night. In the case of the second temple (referred to in ibid., cont.): ON A ROCKY CRAG²⁶Literally: ROCKY TOOTH. The midrash finds the expression well suited to the spur of rock on the Temple mount. AND A STRONGHOLD, < i.e., the Divine Presence was there for > a lodging of many nights.²⁷The number of nights that the Divine Presence lodged in the two temples is the reverse of what one would expect; however, the Buber text is supported by the unemended, traditional text of Lev. R. 20:4 and in Yalqut Shim‘oni, Job 926. Cf. Tanh., Lev. 4:3, which does affirm that the Divine Presence lodged many nights in the first temple. Moreover, we learn there (in Yoma 5:2): WHEN THE ARK HAD BEEN TAKEN AWAY, THERE WAS A CERTAIN STONE THERE FROM THE DAYS OF THE FORMER PROPHETS,²⁸According to Rav Huna, as cited in Sot. 48b, the former prophets are David, Samuel, and Solomon. AND IT WAS NAMED FOUNDATION. And why was it named Foundation? Because out of it the world was founded.²⁹Yoma 54b (bar.); yYoma 5:4 (42c); TYoma 3:6 (2:14); Numb. R. 12:4; see below, Tanh. (Buber), 7:10; Tanh. 7:10. And how would a high-priest pray on the Day of Atonement?³⁰Cf. yYoma 5:3 (42c). A version of this prayer is part of a long piyyut composed by Rabbi Meshullam ben Kalonymus in the tenth century. It is known either as the Avodah or by its initial words, Amits Koah, and appears as part of the Musaf Service on the Day of Atonement. See P. Birnbaum, The High Holyday Prayer Book (New York: Hebrew Publishing Co., 1951), p. 26. May it be your will, O Lord our God, that this year be one of rain, warmth, and dew, a year of low prices, a year of abundance, a year of grace, a year of blessing, a year of trade, a year when your people Israel are not dependent on each other, a year when [< the people of > Israel] will not be arrogant with each other. Now The Rabbis of Caesarea said: < It was > with reference to our brothers in Caesarea < that the high priest prayed > for them not to be arrogant with each other. But {our Rabbi} but [the Rabbis of the South] say: < It was > with reference to our brothers in the South,³¹The parallel texts in Tanh., Lev. 6:3; Lev. R. 20:4, and PRK 26(27):4 all read, “in Sharon.” Cf. Sot. 8:3; ySot. 8:7 (23a); Sot 44a. lest their houses become their tombs.³²For example, if the houses collaped from heavy rains or were buried in a sandstorm.

R. Ahawa bar Ze'era opened (with Job 37:1), “At this also my heart trembles and leaps from its place.” What is the meaning of “and leaps?”³³PRK 26(27):5; Lev. R. 20:5. Jumps, as [Scripture] says (in Lev. 11:21), “[which have knees above their feet] with which to jump upon the earth.” Moreover, we translate [the word as] "to jump" (in the Targum Onqelos of Lev. 11:21). When Titus the wicked entered the holy of holies and cut [open] the curtain,³⁴So Sifre, Deut. 32:38; (328); Git. 56b; Gen. R. 10:7; Lev. R. 22:3; Eccl. R. 5:8:4; Josephus, Contra Apionem 2:82; Ant. 20.250; plus the parallels mentioned above. Cf. Exod. R. 51:5, according to which Hadrian committed the sacrilegious act, and M. Pss. 121:3, according to which it was Titus’ nephew. he entered in peace and came out in peace; but the sons of Aaron entered to offer sacrifice and came out destroyed by fire. It is so stated (in Lev. 16:1), “in their approaching in front of the Lord.”

“How has gold tarnished, the fine gold changed? The sacred stones are spilled at the head of every street” (Lamentations 4:1).
“How has gold tarnished [yuam]?” Rabbi Shmuel said: How has the gold been concealed?¹The midrash interprets the verse as referring to gold that is unrecognizable because it is covered by a layer of grime. This is an analogy to Israel, which at its core remains pure and holy, even though this purity is not always evident due to the travails of exile (Rabbi David Luria). Just as it says: “No mystery can be concealed from you [amamukha]” (Ezekiel 28:3). The Rabbis say: How has gold changed? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: How did the gold dim [ama]? That is what is written: “How does gold tarnish [yuam]?” As Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: “Coals” (Leviticus 16:12), could they be dim [omemot]? The verse states: “Fire” (Leviticus 16:12).²The verse states, regarding the service of the High Priest on Yom Kippur: “He shall take a fire-pan full of coals of fire” (Leviticus 16:12). If fire, is it, perhaps, a flame? The verse states: “Coals.” How so? He brings from these smoldering ones.
“The sacred stones are spilled.” When the Torah scholars would go out to earn their living, they would read in their regard: “The sacred stones are spilled.”³Torah scholars had to abandon their studies in order to earn a livelihood or to collect charity (see Matnot Kehuna; Maharzu). Other scholars would apply this verse to them.
Another matter, it is referring to [the death of] Josiah: “How has gold tarnished,” because he was like a golden ornament. “The fine gold changed,” as his body was like a gem and diamonds. “The sacred stones are spilled,” these are two quarter log of blood that Jeremiah was taking and burying. That is what is written: “He was buried in the tombs of his ancestors” (II Chronicles 35:24). In how many tombs was he buried that you say “in the tombs of his ancestors”? Rather, these are the two quarter log of blood Jeremiah was taking and burying.⁴The midrash asserts that Jeremiah buried Josiah’s blood in multiple locations. Josiah’s blood spilled when his body was pierced repeatedly by enemy arrows, and therefore the midrash finds allusion to Josiah in the phrase “the sacred stones are spilled.”
Another matter, it is referring to the people of Jerusalem, who were like a golden ornament and their bodies like gems and diamonds. If a person will say to you: ‘The verse is not referring to the people of Jerusalem, say to him: It is already written: <“The [precious] sons of Zion” (Lamentations 4:2)>.

“It was due to the sins of her prophets, the iniquities of her priests, who shed the blood of the righteous in her midst” (Lamentations 4:13).
“It was due to the sins of her prophets.” Rabbi Yudan asked Rabbi Aḥa: ‘Where did they kill Zekharya, in the Israelite courtyard or the women’s courtyard?’³⁶The midrash interprets the verse as referring not to the sins of prophets and priests, but rather to the great sin of the murder of Zekharya, who was a prophet and a priest. He said to him: ‘Neither in the Israelite courtyard nor in the women’s courtyard, but rather in the priestly courtyard.’ They did not treat his blood like the blood of a gazelle, nor like the blood of a deer. There it is written: “And any man from the children of Israel…who shall hunt game of a beast or a bird…[he shall pour out its blood], and cover it with dirt” (Leviticus 17:13). However, here it is written: “For her blood was within her; on a bare rock she placed it. She did not pour it on the ground to cover it with dirt” (Ezekiel 24:7). Why to that extent? “To arouse fury to take vengeance, I placed her blood upon the bare rock…” (Ezekiel 24:8).³⁷God brought about that Zekharya’s blood would not be covered in order to motivate the Babylonians to take vengeance upon the Israelites in order to assuage Zekharya’s blood.
Israel committed seven transgressions on that day. They killed a priest, a prophet, and a judge, spilled innocent blood, desecrated the Name, brought impurity to the Temple courtyard, and it was Shabbat and Yom Kippur.³⁸Shabbat and Yom Kippur are considered one, as both are described as a day of sabbatical rest [Shabbat shabbaton] (see, e.g., Exodus 31:15 and Leviticus 16:31) (Etz Yosef). When Nevuzaradan ascended, he saw that the blood of Zekharya was boiling. He said to them: ‘What is this?’ They said to him: ‘It is the blood of bulls and sheep.’ He brought the blood of offerings but it did not resemble it. He brought all kinds of blood but it did not resemble it. He said to them: ‘If you tell me, fine, but if not, I will comb the flesh of these people with iron combs.’³⁹The meaning is: I will comb your flesh with iron combs. It is common in rabbinic literature for people to address others in third person, or to refer to themselves in third person. They did not tell him, but once he said that to them, they said to him: ‘What can we hide from you? We had a prophet-priest who would reprimand us in the name of Heaven, but we did not accept it. We rose against him and killed him.’ He said to them: ‘I will assuage him.’ He brought the Great Sanhedrin and slaughtered them onto it, but it did not rest. He slaughtered the lesser Sanhedrin onto it, but it did not rest. He brought young priests and slaughtered them onto it, but it did not rest. He slaughtered schoolchildren onto it, but it did not rest. He bent over it and said: ‘Zekharya, I have eliminated the best of your people, do you wish me to eradicate all of them?’ It immediately rested. At that moment he contemplated repenting and said: ‘If for one who eliminates the life of one person of Israel it is so, this man,⁴⁰Nevuzaradan was referring to himself. who eliminated many lives, all the more so.’ The Holy One blessed be He became filled with mercy and He intimated to the blood, and it was absorbed in its place. Regarding that moment, it says: “It was due to the sins of its prophets, the iniquities of her priests, who shed the blood of the righteous in its midst.”

4) "coals": I might think dying coals; it is, therefore, written "fire." If "fire," I might think a flame. It is, therefore, written "coals of fire." How is this effected? (He brings) glowing coals. And whence is it derived that the fire is secondary to the coals? From "coals of fire."

4) — But perhaps go in this direction: "Blood" is mentioned (in respect to application) "above," and it is thus mentioned "below." Just as "above" — one, so, "below" — one! Let us see what it most closely resembles. We derive "below" from "below," and we do not derive "below" from above. — But perhaps go in this direction: We derive the blood of the he-goat from the blood of the he-goat, and we do not derive the blood of the he-goat from the blood of the bullock! It is, therefore, written "and he shall do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bullock." Just as with the blood of the bullock, seven below, so, with the blood of the he-goat, seven below.

4) From here they ruled: Wherever there was awareness in the beginning (i.e., where he is aware that he has become unclean), and no awareness in the end, (i.e., where he is not aware that he has touched a sanctified object in his state of uncleanliness), judgment is suspended (by the he-goat presented within and Yom Kippur) until he becomes aware and he brings a sliding scale offering, it being written "from their offenses of all of their sins." (i.e., he is shielded from judgment of those offenses, which, when he becomes aware of them, will result in a sin-offering.) (See Vayikra, Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 13:11-12).

4) "to the tent of meeting": This tells me only of the tent of meeting. Whence do I derive that the same applies in Shiloh and in the Temple? From "to make atonement in the holy place." If one went in (with the blood) to make atonement, even if he did not make atonement, it becomes unfit. These are the words of R. Eliezer. R. Eliezer said: It is written here "to make atonement in the holy place," and elsewhere (Vayikra 16:17): ("And no man shall be in the tent of meeting when he (Aaron) comes) to make atonement in the holy place." Just as there ("to make atonement" implies) that he has not (yet) made atonement, here, too, (the implication is) that he has not yet made atonement. R. Shimon says: It is written here "to make atonement in the holy place," and elsewhere (Vayikra 16:27) ("And the bullock of the sin-offering and the he-goat of the sin-offering, whose blood was brought) to make atonement in the holy place (… and they shall burn in fire, etc.") Just as there ("to make atonement" implies) that he has already made atonement, (for burning comes after atonement), here, too, (the implication is) that atonement has already been made, (the blood having been applied to the altar, but his entering alone does not make the blood unfit.) And if he brought it in unwittingly, it remains kasher, (even if he made atonement on the altar).

4) for if he does come he will die, as his sons died, viz.: "and let him not come … that he not die" — If he comes, he will die!

4) (viz. Yoma 36b) How did he (the high-priest) confess? "Ana Hashem" ("I beseech You, O L–rd") — "I have transgressed, I have offended, I have sinned before You — I and my house — Ana Hashem, atone, I beseech You, for the transgressions, and the offerings, and the sins that I have transgressed, and offended, and sinned before You — I and my house, as it is written in the Torah of Moses Your servant (Vayikra 16:30) 'For on this day He shall atone for you to cleanse you of all your sins; before the L–rd you shall be clean.'" And thus (i.e., in this order) is it written (in respect to the scape-goat, (Vayikra 16:21) "And he shall confess over it all the transgressions of the children of Israel and all their offenses of all of their sins." These are the words of R. Meir. And the sages say: "Transgressions" — these are the deliberate sins. "their offenses" — these are (the sins of) rebellion. "their sins" — these are the unwitting sins. Now if he already confessed for deliberate sins and sins of rebellion, does he now go back and confess for unwitting sins! Rather, the formula for confession is: "Ana Hashem, I have sinned, I have transgressed, I have offended before You, I and my household. Ana Hashem, atone I beseech You, for the sins and the transgressions, and the offenses, that I have sinned, and transgressed, and offended before You, I and my household, as it is written in the Torah of Moses, Your servant 'For on this day He shall atone for you to cleanse you.'" And they answer after him: "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever."

4) (Vayikra 16:21) "And Aaron shall place his two hands on the head of the living he-goat, and he shall confess over it all the transgressions of the children of Israel, and all their offenses of all of their sins, and he shall place them on the head of the he-goat, and he shall send him by the hand of an appointed man to the desert.") "And Aaron shall place his two hands on the head of the he-goat": We are hereby taught that semichah (laying on of hands) with two hands is an archetype (binyan av) for all the semichoth in the Torah.

4) R. Shimon was wont to say: The kids of Rosh Chodesh atone for a tahor eating something unclean; those of the festivals atone for unawareness neither in the beginning nor in the end, and that of Yom Kippur, for awareness in the beginning, but not in the end.

4) Rebbi says: Do I derive it from there? Is it not already written (Vayikra 16:4) "And he shall bathe his flesh in water and he shall put them on," and (Vayikra 16:4) "they are holy garments"? All the garments are likened to each other, to teach that changing from golden vestments to white vestments and from white vestments to golden vestments requires immersion (and since there are five changings, there are five immersions and ten lustrations for each doffing and donning).

4) "to the tent of meeting": This tells me only of the tent of meeting. Whence do I derive that the same applies in Shiloh and in the Temple? From "to make atonement in the holy place." If one went in (with the blood) to make atonement, even if he did not make atonement, it becomes unfit. These are the words of R. Eliezer. R. Eliezer said: It is written here "to make atonement in the holy place," and elsewhere (Vayikra 16:17): ("And no man shall be in the tent of meeting when he (Aaron) comes) to make atonement in the holy place." Just as there ("to make atonement" implies) that he has not (yet) made atonement, here, too, (the implication is) that he has not yet made atonement. R. Shimon says: It is written here "to make atonement in the holy place," and elsewhere (Vayikra 16:27) ("And the bullock of the sin-offering and the he-goat of the sin-offering, whose blood was brought) to make atonement in the holy place (… and they shall burn in fire, etc.") Just as there ("to make atonement" implies) that he has already made atonement, (for burning comes after atonement), here, too, (the implication is) that atonement has already been made, (the blood having been applied to the altar, but his entering alone does not make the blood unfit.) And if he brought it in unwittingly, it remains kasher, (even if he made atonement on the altar).

4) No (i.e., this is no refutation. This may be so of the altar, which did not acquire any of them (the hides), whereas the Cohanim did acquire some of them (those of a burnt-offering), and since they acquired some of them, they should acquire all of them (i.e., the hides of all the higher order offerings!) Rebbi says: The truth is that we need to be apprised of (the status of) the hide of the burnt-offering alone (and we need no a fortiori arguments for the status of the hides of other higher order offerings). For in all instances, the hide "follows" the flesh: In the instance of the burnt-bullocks and the burnt he-goats, their hides are burnt with them, viz. (Vayikra 16:27): ("… he shall take outside the camp) and they shall burn in fire their hides and their flesh and their dung."

4) (Vayikra 16:27) "And the bullock of the sin-offering and the he-goat of the sin-offering, whose blood was brought to make atonement in the holy place, he shall take … (Vayikra 16:28) And he who burns them shall wash his clothes, etc." What is the intent of this (repetition of "sin-offering")? I might think that only these render clothes unclean and are to be burned in the Bet Hadeshen. Whence do I derive for inclusion the bullock of the anointed priest, the bullock of congregational forgetfulness (he'elam davar), and the he-goats brought for (unwitting) idolatry? From the repetition of "sin-offering." These are the words of R. Yehudah. Rebbi says: It is to be inferred from the source itself, viz. "whose blood was brought to atone in the holy place." This is an archetype (binyan av). All (offerings) whose blood enter the inner (sanctuary) — the clothes of him who burns them become unclean. "to make atonement in the holy place": If they have made atonement as prescribed, they are burned in the Bet Hadeshen and render clothes unclean; otherwise (i.e., if there were some unfitness in them), they are burned in the Bet Habirah (a place in the Temple Mount) and they do not render clothes unclean.

4) (Vayikra 16:27) "And the bullock of the sin-offering and the he-goat of the sin-offering, whose blood was brought to make atonement in the holy place, he shall take … (Vayikra 16:28) And he who burns them shall wash his clothes, etc." What is the intent of this (repetition of "sin-offering")? I might think that only these render clothes unclean and are to be burned in the Bet Hadeshen. Whence do I derive for inclusion the bullock of the anointed priest, the bullock of congregational forgetfulness (he'elam davar), and the he-goats brought for (unwitting) idolatry? From the repetition of "sin-offering." These are the words of R. Yehudah. Rebbi says: It is to be inferred from the source itself, viz. "whose blood was brought to atone in the holy place." This is an archetype (binyan av). All (offerings) whose blood enter the inner (sanctuary) — the clothes of him who burns them become unclean. "to make atonement in the holy place": If they have made atonement as prescribed, they are burned in the Bet Hadeshen and render clothes unclean; otherwise (i.e., if there were some unfitness in them), they are burned in the Bet Habirah (a place in the Temple Mount) and they do not render clothes unclean.

4) It was said in the name of R. Yishmael: It is written here "you shall afflict your souls," and, elsewhere, (Devarim 8:3) "And He afflicted you, and caused you to hunger, and fed you with manna." Just as the affliction there is hunger, so, the affliction here is hunger.

4) "with a young bullock for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering": I might think that in the place (the inner altar) where he applies the blood of the bullock, there he applies the blood of the ram. R. Yossi says (to show that this is not so): (It is written [Shemoth 30:9]) "You shall not bring up upon it (the inner altar) strange incense, nor burnt-offering nor meal-offering." Which burnt-offering must Scripture exclude (from the inner altar)? This is the ram for a burnt-offering (of Yom Kippur).

4) (viz. Yoma 36b) How did he (the high-priest) confess? "Ana Hashem" ("I beseech You, O L–rd") — "I have transgressed, I have offended, I have sinned before You — I and my house — Ana Hashem, atone, I beseech You, for the transgressions, and the offerings, and the sins that I have transgressed, and offended, and sinned before You — I and my house, as it is written in the Torah of Moses Your servant (Vayikra 16:30) 'For on this day He shall atone for you to cleanse you of all your sins; before the L–rd you shall be clean.'" And thus (i.e., in this order) is it written (in respect to the scape-goat, (Vayikra 16:21) "And he shall confess over it all the transgressions of the children of Israel and all their offenses of all of their sins." These are the words of R. Meir. And the sages say: "Transgressions" — these are the deliberate sins. "their offenses" — these are (the sins of) rebellion. "their sins" — these are the unwitting sins. Now if he already confessed for deliberate sins and sins of rebellion, does he now go back and confess for unwitting sins! Rather, the formula for confession is: "Ana Hashem, I have sinned, I have transgressed, I have offended before You, I and my household. Ana Hashem, atone I beseech You, for the sins and the transgressions, and the offenses, that I have sinned, and transgressed, and offended before You, I and my household, as it is written in the Torah of Moses, Your servant 'For on this day He shall atone for you to cleanse you.'" And they answer after him: "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever."

4) (Vayikra 16:32) ("And the Cohein shall make atonement, who shall be anointed, and who shall be invested with the priesthood in place of his father; and he shall put on the linen garments, the holy garments.") "And the Cohein shall make atonement, who has been anointed": What is the intent of this? Because this entire section is written in respect to Aaron, I might think that it applies only to Aaron himself. Whence do I derive (for inclusion) a different Cohein? From "who shall be anointed." This tells me only of one anointed by the anointing oil. Whence do I derive (for inclusion a Cohein who wore) the many garments (i.e., the eight garments of the high-priest)? From "who shall be invested" (See Shemoth 29:9). Whence do I derive (for inclusion) a different Cohein who is appointed (to take his place if he becomes disqualified)? From "And the Cohein shall make atonement."

4) Rebbi says: Do I derive it from there? Is it not already written (Vayikra 16:4) "And he shall bathe his flesh in water and he shall put them on," and (Vayikra 16:4) "they are holy garments"? All the garments are likened to each other, to teach that changing from golden vestments to white vestments and from white vestments to golden vestments requires immersion (and since there are five changings, there are five immersions and ten lustrations for each doffing and donning).

4) (viz. Yoma 36b) How did he (the high-priest) confess? "Ana Hashem" ("I beseech You, O L–rd") — "I have transgressed, I have offended, I have sinned before You — I and my house — Ana Hashem, atone, I beseech You, for the transgressions, and the offerings, and the sins that I have transgressed, and offended, and sinned before You — I and my house, as it is written in the Torah of Moses Your servant (Vayikra 16:30) 'For on this day He shall atone for you to cleanse you of all your sins; before the L–rd you shall be clean.'" And thus (i.e., in this order) is it written (in respect to the scape-goat, (Vayikra 16:21) "And he shall confess over it all the transgressions of the children of Israel and all their offenses of all of their sins." These are the words of R. Meir. And the sages say: "Transgressions" — these are the deliberate sins. "their offenses" — these are (the sins of) rebellion. "their sins" — these are the unwitting sins. Now if he already confessed for deliberate sins and sins of rebellion, does he now go back and confess for unwitting sins! Rather, the formula for confession is: "Ana Hashem, I have sinned, I have transgressed, I have offended before You, I and my household. Ana Hashem, atone I beseech You, for the sins and the transgressions, and the offenses, that I have sinned, and transgressed, and offended before You, I and my household, as it is written in the Torah of Moses, Your servant 'For on this day He shall atone for you to cleanse you.'" And they answer after him: "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever."

4) (Vayikra 16:9) ("And Aaron shall present the he-goat on which the lot came up for the L–rd, and he shall make it a sin-offering.") "And Aaron shall present the he-goat on which is the lot for the L–rd": I might think that he places it on its back; it is, therefore, written "on which the lot came up for it" — It came up for His name from the ballot box.

[(Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.] {R. Isaac} [R. Ahawa] bar Ze'era said: (Job 37:1:) AT THIS ALSO MY HEART TREMBLES AND LEAPS FROM ITS PLACE. What is the meaning of AND LEAPS?³⁶Tanh., Lev. 6:4; PRK 26(27):5; Lev. R. 20:5. "Jumps," as < Scripture > says (in Lev. 11:21): < WHICH HAVE KNEES ABOVE THEIR FEET > WITH WHICH TO JUMP UPON THE EARTH. Moreover, we translate < the word > > "to jump" (in the Targum Onqelos of Lev. 11:21). When Titus the Wicked entered the Holy of Holies and {sawed} [cut] < open > the curtain,³⁷So Sifre, Deut. 32:38; (328); Git. 56b; Gen. R. 10:7; Lev. R. 22:3; Eccl. R. 5:8:4; Josephus, Contra Apionem 2:82; Ant. 20.250; plus the parallels mentioned above. Cf. Exod. R. 51:5, according to which Hadrian committed the sacrilegious act, and M. Pss. 121:3, according to which it was Titus’ nephew. Cf. also Mark 25:38 // Matthew 37:51 // Luke 23:45. he entered in peace and came out in peace; but the sons of Aaron entered to offer sacrifice and came out destroyed by fire. [It is so stated (in Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.

(Lev. 16:1:) “After the death of Aaron's two sons.” R. Berekhyah opened (his discourse with Prov. 17:26), “To punish also the righteous is not good; to smite the noble ones for uprightness.”³⁵Lev. R. 20:6; PRK 26(27):6/7. Said the Holy One, blessed be He, “Although I punished Aaron (for the golden calf) by taking his two children from him, it is not good. It was only (according to ibid., cont.) “to smite the noble ones for uprightness.”³⁶Perhaps either because they themselves had sinned or in order to sanctify the Divine Name, since (according to Lev. 10:3) Aaron accepted their deaths in silence. See Enoch Zundel in his commentary on Tanh., Lev. 6:5.

(Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF < AARON'S TWO SONS >. R. Berekhyah opened (with Prov. 17:26): TO PUNISH ALSO THE RIGHTEOUS IS NOT GOOD.³⁸Tanh., Lev. 6:5; Lev. R. 20:6; PRK 26(27):6/7. Although the Holy One punished Aaron (for the golden calf) by taking his two children from him, it IS NOT GOOD. It was only (according to ibid., cont.) TO SMITE THE NOBLE ONES FOR UPRIGHTNESS.³⁹Perhaps either because they themselves had sinned or in order to sanctify the Divine Name, since (according to Lev. 10:3) Aaron accepted their deaths in silence. See Enoch Zundel in his commentary on the parallel in Tanh., Lev. 6:5. This is what is written (in Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF < AARON'S TWO SONS >….

“Like the tents of Kedar,” just as the tents of Kedar appear externally to be ugly, black, and in tatters, but internally they are gems and pearls, so too Torah scholars, even though they appear ugly and black in this world, internally there is Torah in them, Bible, Mishna, Midrash, halakhot, Talmud, Tosefta, and aggada. If so, just as tents of Kedar do not require laundering, perhaps the same is true of Israel; the verse states: “Like the curtains of Solomon”—just as these curtains of Solomon are soiled and laundered, and are again soiled and laundered, so, too, Israel, even though they are soiled with sins all the days of the year, Yom Kippur arrives and atones for them, as it is stated: “For on this day He will atone for you” (Leviticus 16:30), and it is written: “If your sins will be like scarlet, they will be whitened as snow; if they will be reddened like crimson, they will be like wool” (Isaiah 1:18).
If so, just as the tents of Kedar are moved from place to place, perhaps the same is true of Israel. The verse states: “Like the curtains of Solomon [Shelomo],” like the curtains¹⁹⁷The heavens. of the One [of Whom it may be stated] that the peace is His, the One Who spoke and the world came into being, that from the moment He spread them, they did not move from their place. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov taught: “A tent that will not be displaced [yatzan]” (Isaiah 33:20); it will not emerge [yetze] and will not move [yanua].¹⁹⁸Yatzan is an acronym of yetze and yanua.
Just as the tents of Kedar are not subject to the yoke of any creature,¹⁹⁹The reference is to nomads who live in the wilderness. so too, Israel, in the future, will not be subject to the yoke of any creature. Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: “I led you upright” (Leviticus 26:13); with an upright stature, without fear of any creature.²⁰⁰Although the verse cited is stated regarding the exodus from Egypt, it is understood as also alluding to the future redemption. Rabbi Yudan said: Like Joseph; just as Joseph was sold to the tents of Kedar, as it is stated: “They sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites… [and they brought Joseph to Egypt]” (Genesis 37:28), and he then purchased his purchasers, as it is stated: “Joseph purchased all the land of Egypt” (Genesis 47:20), so too Israel: “They will be captors of their captors” (Isaiah 14:2).

5) "from off the altar": I might think (from) all of it; it is, therefore, written "before the L–rd." How is this effected? (He takes the coals from that part of the altar) which is close to the west, (before the entrance to the sanctuary).

5) And I would not know how many to apply of the blood of the bullock above. (But I derive it as follows:) Application of the blood above is mentioned in respect to the he-goat, and application of the blood above is mentioned in respect to the bullock. Just as with the first, there is one application, so, with the second.

5) "and so shall he do for the tent of meeting": Just as he does in the holy of holies, so does he do in the sanctuary. Just as in the holy of holies, one above and seven below of the blood of the bullock, so, in the sanctuary. And just as in the holy of holies, one above and seven below of the blood of the he-goat, so, in the sanctuary." "who dwells with them in the midst of their tumah": Even though they are tamei, the Shechinah dwells among them.

5) It was said in the name of R. Yishmael: Since two dicta are mentioned here, one aside the other, ( 1) "And the L–rd spoke to Moses…" 2) "And the L–rd said to Moses…", one (i.e., the second) "open" (i.e., explained); the other, (the first) "closed" (i.e., unexplained), the "open" elucidates the closed, viz.: Just as the "open" speaks of Moses' telling Aaron not to enter the sanctuary, so, the "closed" speaks of Moses' telling Aaron not to enter the sanctuary. And in what connection is this mentioned? That of (abstaining from) wine and strong drink (before entering the sanctuary), viz. (Vayikra 10:6) "And let your brethren, the entire house of Israel, mourn the burning that the L–rd has burned… (Vayikra 10:8) And the L–rd spoke to Aaron, saying … Wine or strong drink you shall not drink, etc."

5) "on the head of the living": the living (he-goat) requires semichah, and not the he-goats (sacrificed) for (unwitting congregational) service of idolatry, viz. (Bamidbar 15:24). These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon says: The living he-goat requires semichah by Aaron (and his sons), but not the idolatry he-goats. For R. Shimon was wont to say: Every congregational sin-offering, whose blood enters within (the sanctuary) requires semichah.

5) They asked him: May this be offered up for the other? (i.e., If the kid designated for Yom Kippur were lost, and atonement was made with another, and the first were found on a festival or Rosh Chodesh, may it be used as the kid offering of the day?) He answered: They may be offered. They asked him: But if their atonement is not the same, how can one be substituted for the other? He answered: They all come for defiling the sanctuary and its holy objects.

5) He would perform five services: the morning tamid (daily burnt-offering) in golden vestments and the service of the day in white garments; his ram and the ram of the people, in white vestments. He then entered (the sanctuary) to take out the incense ladle and the coal pan, in white vestments, and he performed (the service of) the afternoon tamid in golden vestments. "And he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place and he shall put on his garments." This must be speaking of lustration of hands and feet. And whence is it derived that there are two lustrations of hands and feet for each immersion? From "and he shall take off … and he shall wash … and he shall wash and he shall put on" (connoting that lustration is required both for doffing and for donning.) R. Elazar b. R. Shimon said: This follows a fortiori, viz.: If in a place (the tent of meeting, all the days of the year) where immersion is not required, lustration of hands and feet is required (viz. Shemoth 40:32), then in a place where immersion is required (i.e., on Yom Kippur, for each change of clothing), how much more so is lustration of hands and feet required!

5) "he shall take outside the camp": Elsewhere, (in respect to the bullock of the congregation and the bullock of the anointed Cohein,) you give them three camps (i.e., they must be burned outside of three camps, viz., the azarah, the Temple Mount, and Jerusalem), and here you give them one camp. If so, what is the intent of "he shall take outside the camp"? To teach that as soon as he leaves one camp he who burns them renders (his) garments unclean.

5) "And all work you shall not do": I might think he should not clean greens, and not spread beds, and not rinse cups; but it follows (that this is not so, viz.:) It is written here "work," and it is written in respect to the work of the tabernacle "work." Just as "work" there involves (prior) deliberation, so, "work" here.

5) "with the priesthood in place of his father": We are hereby taught that the son takes precedence to all others (for appointment to the high-priesthood). I might think that this is so even if he cannot (properly) fill his father's station. It is, therefore, written "and who shall be invested (lit., "and who shall fill his hand"). If he can fill his father's station, he takes precedence; if not, let another come and serve in his stead.

5) (Vayikra 16:4) ("A holy linen tunic shall he wear, and linen breeches shall be upon his flesh, and with a linen girdle shall he gird himself, and a linen mitre shall he place upon his head; they are holy garments. And he shall bathe his flesh in water, and he shall put them on.") See Tzav, Chapter 2:1.

5) And thus do we find with all the "confessors." David said (Tehillim 106:6) "We have sinned with our fathers; we have transgressed, and we have been wicked" (i.e., offended). Solomon, his son, said (I Melachim 8:47) "We have sinned, and we have transgressed, and we have been wicked." Daniel said (Daniel 9:5) "We have sinned, and we have transgressed, and we have been wicked and rebelled." He, too, confessed thus: "I have sinned, and I have transgressed, and I have offended before You."

5) "and he shall make it": that if one of them died after he had cast the ballot, he brings the others and casts the lot upon them as in the beginning, and says: If the one for the L–rd died, then this one, for whom the lot came up "for the L–rd" is in its place. And if the one for Azazel died, then this one, for whom the lot came up "for Azazel" is in its place, and the second one is to die. These are the words of R. Yehudah. The sages say: It is made to graze until it sustains a blemish, and is sold, and its monies are given for a donative offering. "and he shall make it a sin-offering": He says: "For the L–rd, a sin-offering." R. Yishmael says: He did not have to say "a sin-offering," but only "for the L–rd."

(Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF < AARON'S TWO SONS >. {R. Eliezer cited a baraita:} [According to a baraita in the name of R. Eliezer,]⁴⁰In y‘Eruv. 6:1 (31c); yGit. 1:2 (39c); ‘Eruv. 63b. Nadab and Abihu died only because they had taught halakhah in the presence of their master, Moses.⁴¹Tanh., Lev. 6:6; Lev. R. 20:7; PRK 26(27):6/7; yShevi. 6:1 (36c); yGit. 1:2 (43c). There is a story about Rabbi Eliezer, that his disciple taught halakhah before him. So he said to his wife, Mamma Shalom: This man will not live out the year; and indeed he did not live out the year. His disciples said to him: O Our Master, are you a prophet? He said to them (in the words of Amos 7:14): I AM NEITHER A PROPHET NOR THE SON OF A PROPHET. Rather this was handed down to me from my masters: Whoever teaches halakhah in the presence of his master is under sentence of death.

(Lev. 16:1:) “After the death of Aaron's two sons.” It was taught in a baraita in the name of R. Eliezer:³⁷In y‘Eruv. 6:1 (31c); yGit. 1:2 (39c); ‘Eruv. 63b. Nadab and Abihu died only because they had taught halakhah in the presence of their master, Moses.³⁸Lev. R. 20:7; PRK 26(27):6/7; yShevi. 6:1 (36c); yGit. 1:2 (43c). There is a story about a disciple that taught halakhah before his master. So his colleague said to his wife, Mamma Shalom, “This man will not live out the year.” And indeed he did not live out the year. His disciples said to him, “O our master, are you a prophet?” He said to them (in the words of Amos 7:14), “’I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet.’ Rather this was handed down to me from my masters, ‘Whoever teaches halakhah in the presence of his master is under sentence of death.’” According to a baraita a disciple is forbidden to teach halakhah in the presence of his master until he is twelve mil³⁹Lat.: mille, i.e., a “thousand” paces. away from him, [a distance] corresponding to the [extent of] the camp of Israel.⁴⁰Lev. R. 20:7. This is what is written (in Numb. 33:49), “They encamped by the Jordan from Beth-Jeshimoth as far as Abel-Shittim.” R. Nahum bar Jeremiah was in [Hefer]. They would ask him, and he would teach. They said to him, “Rabbi, have we not learned thus: A student is forbidden to teach halakhah in the presence of his master until he is twelve mil away from him, [a distance] corresponding to the camp of Israel? And your master, R. Mani, dwells in Sepphoris.” He said to them, “Surely if I had known [of his presence], I would not have taught.” From that time on he did not teach [there]. In four places [Scripture] mentions the death of Aaron's sons,⁴¹In Lev. 10:2-3; 16:1; Numb. 3:4; 26:61. and it also mentions their transgression. And why all this?⁴²PRK 26(27):8; Lev. R. 20:8; Numb. R. 2:24. To inform you that they had only this sin on their hands. R. Eleazar of Modim said, “Go out and see how grievous the death of Aaron's sons was for the Holy One, blessed be He; for in every place that [Scripture] mentions their death, it mentions their transgression. And why all this? So as not to give those who come into the world a pretext for saying, ‘Disgraceful acts were secretly done by them, because of which they died.’” Bar Qappara said in the name of R. Jeremiah bar Eleazar, “Aaron's sons died because of four things: For the drawing near, for the sacrificing, for alien fire, and for not taking advice from each other.⁴³Numb. R. 2:23. For drawing near, in that they entered the innermost sanctuary. For the sacrificing, in that they offered a sacrifice, which they had not been commanded [to offer]. For alien fire, in that they had brought fire from a cookhouse (instead of from off the altar). And for not taking advice from each other.” R. Mani of Sha'av and R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “Aaron's sons died because of four things, and [a sentence of] death is recorded in connection with all of them.⁴⁴PRK 26 (27):9; Lev. R. 20:9. Because they entered without washing hands and feet, and it says (in Exod. 30:20), ‘When they come unto the tent of meeting, they shall wash with water lest they die.’ Because they entered while lacking [the proper priestly] clothes, and it says (in Exod. 28:43), ‘And they shall be upon Aaron and his sons in their coming to the tent of meeting….’” And what did they lack? R. Levi said, “They were lacking a robe, and [a sentence of] death is recorded in connection with [that lack], where it is stated (in Exod. 28:35), ‘And it (the robe with golden bells and pomegranates) shall be upon Aaron for officiating, so that the sound of it shall be heard, [when he comes into the sanctuary]… [lest he die].’” “And because they had no children, and [a sentence of] death is recorded in connection with [that lack], where it is stated (in Numb. 3:4), ‘But Nadab and Abihu died…; and they had no children.’ Because they entered and had drunk wine, and it says (in Lev. 10:9), ‘Drink no wine or intoxicating liquor… lest you die.’” Abba Hanin says, “Because they had no wives, and it is recorded (in Lev. 16:6), ‘and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household.’” R. Levi said, “They had a lot of arrogance and were saying, ‘Which woman is worthy of us?’⁴⁵Lev. R. 20:10; below, Lev. 6:13. A lot of women were remaining unmarried and waiting for them. But they were saying, ‘Our father’s brother is king, our father is high priest, our mother's brother is prince, [and] we are deputy high priests. Which woman is worthy of us?’” R. Menahama [said] in the name of R. Joshua bar Hanina, “[It is] about them [that] it says (in Ps. 78:63), ‘Fire devoured their young men, and their maidens had no nuptial song.’ Why had fire devoured their young men? Because of their maidens, who had no nuptial song.” And moreover, [their arrogance may be inferred] from this (i.e., from Exod. 24:1), “Then He said unto Moses, ‘Go up unto the Lord, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu.’” This teaches that Moses and Aaron walked first, while Nadab and Abihu came after them; but still they were saying, “When will these two old men die, and we shall assume authority over the community in their place?”⁴⁶See below, Lev. 6:13. R. Judan said in the name of R. Ayyevu, “They said it to each other with their mouths, they said it in front of [Moshe and Aharon].” R. Pinhas said, “They pondered it in their hearts.” R. Berekhyah said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (in Prov. 27:1), ‘Do not boast of tomorrow, since you do not know what will be born today’; a lot of colts have died, and their skins have been made into coverings for their mothers’ backs.” And in addition [their transgression may be inferred] from this (i.e., from Exod. 24:11), “But He (i.e., the Holy One, blessed be He,) still did not raise His hand against the nobles of the Children of Israel.” From here [it follows] that they deserved to have a hand raised [against them]. R. Hosha'ya said, “Did cellaria⁴⁷The word is Latin. (i.e., provisions) go up with them to Sinai, since it says (ibid., cont.), ‘they beheld God, [and they ate and drank]?’ It is simply that they feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence. [Hence they were] like someone who beholds his colleague in the midst of eating and drinking.” R. Johanan said, “[There was] actual eating [and drinking], since it is written (in Prov. 16:15), ‘In the light of the king's face there is life; His favor is like a rain cloud in spring.’” R. Tanhuma said, “[Exod. 24:11] teaches that they became bold in their hearts and stood on their feet, [while] they feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence.” R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “Moses did not feast his eyes on the Divine Presence, as stated (in Exod. 3:6), ‘Moses hid his face….’ In reward for (Exodus 3:6, cont.) ‘and he feared,’ he merited (Exod. 34:30), ‘and they feared to approach him’; in reward for (Exodus 3:6, cont.) ‘from gazing,’ he merited (Numbers 12:8) ‘and he gazed [at] the picture of the Lord’; in reward for ‘Moses hid his face,’ he merited (Exod. 34:30), ‘and behold, his skin of his face shone.‘ But Nadav and Avihu feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence, but did not benefit from the Divine Presence.” And in addition, [the boldness of Aaron's sons may be inferred] from this (i.e., from Numb. 3:4), “But Nadab and Abihu died before the Lord […].” R. Johanan, said, “Was it before the Lord that they died? [The verse] simply teaches that it is grievous for the Omnipresent when children of righteous people pass away during their [parents'] lifetime.” R. Nahman asked in front of R. Pinhas bar Hama beRabbi Simon, “Here (Numb. 3:40), ‘before the Lord’ [occurs] two times. But later (I Chronicles 24:2), ‘in the presence of their father’ [occurs only] one time.” It is simply that it teaches that it was twice as grievous for the Holy One, blessed be He, as for their father. (Numb. 4:3:) “In the Sinai Desert.” R. Meir said, “Did they die in the Sinai Desert? It is simply that from Mount Sinai they received their sentence of death.⁴⁸Their death actually took place at the Tent of Meeting. [The situation is comparable] to a king who was marrying off his daughter, when there was found something obscene in his bridal agent.⁴⁹Gk.: syskenos (“comrade”). The king said, ‘If I kill him now, I shall impede my daughter's joy. Tomorrow my joy is coming, and I will kill him. It is better [to kill him] during my own joyous celebration, and not during my daughter's joyous celebration.’ Similarly the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘If I kill Nadab and Abihu now, I shall impede the joyous celebration of the Torah. Tomorrow My own joyous celebration is coming. It is better [to kill them] during My own joyous celebration, and not during the joyous celebration of the Torah.’ This is what is written (in Cant. 3:11), ‘on his wedding day,’ i.e., the day of the giving of Torah; ‘in the day of his joyful heart,’ i.e., in the tent of meeting.”

(Lev. 16:1:) “After the death of Aaron's two sons.” It was taught in a baraita in the name of R. Eliezer:³⁷In y‘Eruv. 6:1 (31c); yGit. 1:2 (39c); ‘Eruv. 63b. Nadab and Abihu died only because they had taught halakhah in the presence of their master, Moses.³⁸Lev. R. 20:7; PRK 26(27):6/7; yShevi. 6:1 (36c); yGit. 1:2 (43c). There is a story about a disciple that taught halakhah before his master. So his colleague said to his wife, Mamma Shalom, “This man will not live out the year.” And indeed he did not live out the year. His disciples said to him, “O our master, are you a prophet?” He said to them (in the words of Amos 7:14), “’I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet.’ Rather this was handed down to me from my masters, ‘Whoever teaches halakhah in the presence of his master is under sentence of death.’” According to a baraita a disciple is forbidden to teach halakhah in the presence of his master until he is twelve mil³⁹Lat.: mille, i.e., a “thousand” paces. away from him, [a distance] corresponding to the [extent of] the camp of Israel.⁴⁰Lev. R. 20:7. This is what is written (in Numb. 33:49), “They encamped by the Jordan from Beth-Jeshimoth as far as Abel-Shittim.” R. Nahum bar Jeremiah was in [Hefer]. They would ask him, and he would teach. They said to him, “Rabbi, have we not learned thus: A student is forbidden to teach halakhah in the presence of his master until he is twelve mil away from him, [a distance] corresponding to the camp of Israel? And your master, R. Mani, dwells in Sepphoris.” He said to them, “Surely if I had known [of his presence], I would not have taught.” From that time on he did not teach [there]. In four places [Scripture] mentions the death of Aaron's sons,⁴¹In Lev. 10:2-3; 16:1; Numb. 3:4; 26:61. and it also mentions their transgression. And why all this?⁴²PRK 26(27):8; Lev. R. 20:8; Numb. R. 2:24. To inform you that they had only this sin on their hands. R. Eleazar of Modim said, “Go out and see how grievous the death of Aaron's sons was for the Holy One, blessed be He; for in every place that [Scripture] mentions their death, it mentions their transgression. And why all this? So as not to give those who come into the world a pretext for saying, ‘Disgraceful acts were secretly done by them, because of which they died.’” Bar Qappara said in the name of R. Jeremiah bar Eleazar, “Aaron's sons died because of four things: For the drawing near, for the sacrificing, for alien fire, and for not taking advice from each other.⁴³Numb. R. 2:23. For drawing near, in that they entered the innermost sanctuary. For the sacrificing, in that they offered a sacrifice, which they had not been commanded [to offer]. For alien fire, in that they had brought fire from a cookhouse (instead of from off the altar). And for not taking advice from each other.” R. Mani of Sha'av and R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “Aaron's sons died because of four things, and [a sentence of] death is recorded in connection with all of them.⁴⁴PRK 26 (27):9; Lev. R. 20:9. Because they entered without washing hands and feet, and it says (in Exod. 30:20), ‘When they come unto the tent of meeting, they shall wash with water lest they die.’ Because they entered while lacking [the proper priestly] clothes, and it says (in Exod. 28:43), ‘And they shall be upon Aaron and his sons in their coming to the tent of meeting….’” And what did they lack? R. Levi said, “They were lacking a robe, and [a sentence of] death is recorded in connection with [that lack], where it is stated (in Exod. 28:35), ‘And it (the robe with golden bells and pomegranates) shall be upon Aaron for officiating, so that the sound of it shall be heard, [when he comes into the sanctuary]… [lest he die].’” “And because they had no children, and [a sentence of] death is recorded in connection with [that lack], where it is stated (in Numb. 3:4), ‘But Nadab and Abihu died…; and they had no children.’ Because they entered and had drunk wine, and it says (in Lev. 10:9), ‘Drink no wine or intoxicating liquor… lest you die.’” Abba Hanin says, “Because they had no wives, and it is recorded (in Lev. 16:6), ‘and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household.’” R. Levi said, “They had a lot of arrogance and were saying, ‘Which woman is worthy of us?’⁴⁵Lev. R. 20:10; below, Lev. 6:13. A lot of women were remaining unmarried and waiting for them. But they were saying, ‘Our father’s brother is king, our father is high priest, our mother's brother is prince, [and] we are deputy high priests. Which woman is worthy of us?’” R. Menahama [said] in the name of R. Joshua bar Hanina, “[It is] about them [that] it says (in Ps. 78:63), ‘Fire devoured their young men, and their maidens had no nuptial song.’ Why had fire devoured their young men? Because of their maidens, who had no nuptial song.” And moreover, [their arrogance may be inferred] from this (i.e., from Exod. 24:1), “Then He said unto Moses, ‘Go up unto the Lord, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu.’” This teaches that Moses and Aaron walked first, while Nadab and Abihu came after them; but still they were saying, “When will these two old men die, and we shall assume authority over the community in their place?”⁴⁶See below, Lev. 6:13. R. Judan said in the name of R. Ayyevu, “They said it to each other with their mouths, they said it in front of [Moshe and Aharon].” R. Pinhas said, “They pondered it in their hearts.” R. Berekhyah said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them (in Prov. 27:1), ‘Do not boast of tomorrow, since you do not know what will be born today’; a lot of colts have died, and their skins have been made into coverings for their mothers’ backs.” And in addition [their transgression may be inferred] from this (i.e., from Exod. 24:11), “But He (i.e., the Holy One, blessed be He,) still did not raise His hand against the nobles of the Children of Israel.” From here [it follows] that they deserved to have a hand raised [against them]. R. Hosha'ya said, “Did cellaria⁴⁷The word is Latin. (i.e., provisions) go up with them to Sinai, since it says (ibid., cont.), ‘they beheld God, [and they ate and drank]?’ It is simply that they feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence. [Hence they were] like someone who beholds his colleague in the midst of eating and drinking.” R. Johanan said, “[There was] actual eating [and drinking], since it is written (in Prov. 16:15), ‘In the light of the king's face there is life; His favor is like a rain cloud in spring.’” R. Tanhuma said, “[Exod. 24:11] teaches that they became bold in their hearts and stood on their feet, [while] they feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence.” R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “Moses did not feast his eyes on the Divine Presence, as stated (in Exod. 3:6), ‘Moses hid his face….’ In reward for (Exodus 3:6, cont.) ‘and he feared,’ he merited (Exod. 34:30), ‘and they feared to approach him’; in reward for (Exodus 3:6, cont.) ‘from gazing,’ he merited (Numbers 12:8) ‘and he gazed [at] the picture of the Lord’; in reward for ‘Moses hid his face,’ he merited (Exod. 34:30), ‘and behold, his skin of his face shone.‘ But Nadav and Avihu feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence, but did not benefit from the Divine Presence.” And in addition, [the boldness of Aaron's sons may be inferred] from this (i.e., from Numb. 3:4), “But Nadab and Abihu died before the Lord […].” R. Johanan, said, “Was it before the Lord that they died? [The verse] simply teaches that it is grievous for the Omnipresent when children of righteous people pass away during their [parents'] lifetime.” R. Nahman asked in front of R. Pinhas bar Hama beRabbi Simon, “Here (Numb. 3:40), ‘before the Lord’ [occurs] two times. But later (I Chronicles 24:2), ‘in the presence of their father’ [occurs only] one time.” It is simply that it teaches that it was twice as grievous for the Holy One, blessed be He, as for their father. (Numb. 4:3:) “In the Sinai Desert.” R. Meir said, “Did they die in the Sinai Desert? It is simply that from Mount Sinai they received their sentence of death.⁴⁸Their death actually took place at the Tent of Meeting. [The situation is comparable] to a king who was marrying off his daughter, when there was found something obscene in his bridal agent.⁴⁹Gk.: syskenos (“comrade”). The king said, ‘If I kill him now, I shall impede my daughter's joy. Tomorrow my joy is coming, and I will kill him. It is better [to kill him] during my own joyous celebration, and not during my daughter's joyous celebration.’ Similarly the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘If I kill Nadab and Abihu now, I shall impede the joyous celebration of the Torah. Tomorrow My own joyous celebration is coming. It is better [to kill them] during My own joyous celebration, and not during the joyous celebration of the Torah.’ This is what is written (in Cant. 3:11), ‘on his wedding day,’ i.e., the day of the giving of Torah; ‘in the day of his joyful heart,’ i.e., in the tent of meeting.”

“A handful of tranquility is better than two handfuls of toil and herding wind” (Ecclesiastes 4:6).
“A handful of tranquility is better” – one who studies halakhot and is familiar with them is better than one who studies halakhot and the hermeneutical principles but does not review them and familiarize himself with them. The parable says: One bound bird is better than one hundred that are flying. “And herding [urut] wind” – his wish [re’utei] is to be called “master of the mekhiltot.”¹⁴A reference to the midrash halakha on the book of Exodus, largely based on hermeneutical exposition of the verses.
Another matter: “A handful of tranquility is better” – one who performs minimal acts of charity with his own [funds] is better than one who steals, robs, or exploits others and performs great acts of charity from that of others. The parable says: She commits adultery for apples and distributes them to the poor. “And herding [urut] wind” – his wish [re’utei] is to be called “master of mitzvot.”
Another matter: “A handful of tranquility is better” – one who has ten gold pieces and conducts business and earns a livelihood from them is better than one who takes the property of others and squanders it and loses it. The parable says: It is not enough that he loses his own, but he loses that of others, what is his and what is not his. “And herding [urut] wind” – his wish [re’utei] is to be called a merchant.
Another matter: “A handful of tranquility is better” – one who rents one garden and eats its fruit is better than one who rents many gardens and leaves them fallow. The parable says: One who rents a garden will eat birds; one who rents many gardens, birds will eat them. “And herding [urut] wind” – his wish [re’utei] is to be called a property owner.
Rabbi Yaakov ben Rabbi Kurshai said: “A handful of tranquility is better” in the World to Come “than two handfuls of toil and herding wind” in this world. He would say: One hour of satisfaction in the World to Come is preferable to the entire life of this world, and one hour of repentance and good deeds in this world is preferable to the entire life of the World to Come, as the World to Come comes by virtue of this world.
Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: “A handful of tranquility is better” – this is the Shabbat day; “than two handfuls of toil and herding wind” – these are the seven days of action, as Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: Israel is redeemed only thanks to Shabbat, as it is stated: “In stillness [beshuva] and quiet [vanaḥat] you will be saved” (Isaiah 30:15), with cessation from work and rest you will be saved. “And herding wind” – his wish is to be called one who works and eats.
Rabbi Berekhya said: The trampling that the Holy One blessed be He trampled in the land of Egypt, as it is stated: “I will pass in the land of Egypt on that night” (Exodus 12:12), is better than two handfuls, than their two handfuls of furnace soot. Why? It is because in this one there is redemption and they were redeemed, and in this of furnace soot, they were not redeemed.
Rabbi Yitzḥak interpreted the verse regarding the tribe of Gad and the tribe of Reuben who came to the Land of Israel and saw the amount of room for sowing that was in it, the amount of room for planting that was in it. They said: “A handful of tranquility is better” in the Land of Israel, “than two handfuls of toil” across the Jordan. They reconsidered and said: Did we not cause this to ourselves, did we not say: “Let this land be given to your servants” (Numbers 32:5)?
Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is written: “The cloud of incense will cover” (Leviticus 16:13). This cover, we do not know what it is, until David came and explained it, as it is stated: “You forgave the iniquity of Your people, [You covered all their sins]” (Psalms 85:3). The Holy One blessed be He, too, said: The poor person’s handful of the gift meal offering is dearer to Me than the High Priest’s two handfuls of the incense of the spices. Why? It is because this one comes for atonement and that one does not come for atonement, as it is written: “When a person [venefesh]¹⁵The connotation is that it is as though the person in sacrificing his soul [nefesh] and thereby gaining atonement. sacrifices a meal offering to the Lord” (Leviticus 2:1).

On the seventh day after the Ten Commandments Moshe went up on the mountain, as it says "The Presence of the LORD abode on Mount Sinai, and the cloud hid it for six days..." (Shemot 24:16) This was in order for Moshe to purify himself. "On the seventh day He called to Moses from the midst of the cloud." (ibid.) "Moses went inside the cloud and ascended the mountain; and Moses remained on the mountain forty days and forty nights." (Shemot 24:18) On the 17th of Tammuz he came down and shattered the tablets, "The next day Moses said to the people, “You have been guilty of a great sin. Yet I will now go up to the LORD; perhaps I may win forgiveness for your sin.” Moshe went back up on the 18th of Tammuz and pleaded for mercy on behalf of Israel, as it is written "When I lay prostrate before the LORD those forty days and forty nights, because the LORD was determined to destroy you," (Devarim 9:25) At that moment, the Holy One once again viewed Israel with favor and said to Moshe to carve new tablets and to come up the mountain once again, as it says "Thereupon the LORD said to me, “Carve out two tablets of stone like the first, and come up to Me on the mountain; and make an ark of wood." (Devarim 10:1) He came down on the 28th of Av and carved the second tablets, as it says "So Moses carved two tablets of stone, like the first, and early in the morning he went up on Mount Sinai..." (Shemot 34:4) He went back up on the 29th of Av and the Torah was repeated to him a second time, as it says "I had stayed on the mountain, as I did the first time, forty days and forty nights; and the LORD heeded me once again: the LORD agreed not to destroy you." (Devarim 10:10) 'As I did the first time,' just as the first was a time of favor, so too the second were a time of favor- we can derive from this that those in the middle were a time of anger. He came down on the 10th of Tishre, which was Yom Kippur, and announced to them that they had found favor before God (Hamakom), as it says "Pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for Your own!” (Shemot 34:9) Therefore it was established as a fixed day and a remembrance for the generations, as it says "This shall be to you a law for all time: to make atonement for the Israelites for all their sins once a year..." (Vayikra 16:34)

Another comment on The tongue of the righteous is as choice silver (Prov. 10:30). This refers to the Holy One, blessed be He, who chose the tongue of Moses when he told him: When thou takest the sum (to obtain forgiveness). What is written above concerning this very matter? And Aaron shall make atonement upon the horns of it once in the year (Exod. 30:10). After Israel had sinned, the Holy One, blessed be said to Moses: Go, atone for them. Whereupon Moses replied: Did You not say to me once in the year? The Holy One, blessed be He, replied: Go lift up their heads (obtain forgiveness) now. Then Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of the Universe, when they do good let them be at rest, but when they are without merit, as though that were possible, let them be forgiven once a year in order that the Day of Atonement may come and atonement be made for them, as it is said: For on that day shall atonement be made for you (Lev. 16:30).

6) (Vayikra 16:10) ("And the he-goat on which the lot came up for Azazel shall be stood living before the L–rd, to make atonement over it, to send it to Azazel to the desert.") "and the he-goat on which is the lot": I might think that he places it on its back; it is, therefore, written "on which the lot came up for it" — It came up for its name from the ballot box. "shall be stood living before the L–rd": What is the intent of this? Because it is written "to send it (to Azazel"), I might think that it is to be sent to life; it is, therefore, written "shall be stood living before the L–rd." How is this to be understood? His standing is "living before the L–rd," and its death is (to be precipitated) from Tzor (a mountain).

6) Whence is it derived that just as another Cohein is readied to take his place in case he becomes disqualified, so, another woman is conditionally betrothed for him lest something happens to his wife? From (Vayikra 16:11) "And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house" — "his house" being his wife. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Yossi said to him: "If so, there is no end to the matter!"

6) R. Yossi said: This is the sign (i.e., the rule): Anything (e.g., coals) which is taken from the outside (of the sanctuary) to be placed within, is taken from (the side of the altar) which is close to the (entrance of) the sanctuary.

6) But perhaps go in this direction: "Blood" is mentioned (in respect to application) "below," and it is thus mentioned "above." Just as "below" — seven, so, "above" — seven!

6) (Vayikra 16:17) ("And no man shall be in the tent of meeting when he comes to make atonement in the holy place until he goes out. And he shall make atonement for himself, and for his household, and for the entire congregation of Israel.") "And no man shall be": I might think in the azaroth (the Temple courts); it is, therefore, written "in the tent of meeting." This tells me only of the tent of meeting (in the desert). Whence do I derive (the same for) Shiloh and for the Temple? From "in the holy place." This tells me only of the time that he enters with the incense. Whence do I derive (the same) for the time that he enters with the blood? From "when he comes to make atonement" (which is done by the sprinkling of the blood). This tells me (that no one shall be there) only upon his entering. Whence do I derive (the same for) his leaving? From "until he goes out." "And he shall make atonement for himself, and for his household, and for the entire congregation of Israel.": His own atonement comes before that for his household, and that for his household comes before that for all of Israel.

6) Aaron is constrained from coming (into the sanctuary), but Moses is not. — But perhaps (the meaning is that) Aaron is constrained from coming, but not his sons. R. Eliezer said: Would that follow? If one, (Aaron), who was commanded to come (into the holy of holies on Yom Kippur), was (here) commanded not to come, then one, (an ordinary Cohein), who was not commanded to come (on Yom Kippur), how much more so is he commanded (here) not to come! — No, this is refuted by the instance of those (Cohanim) without blemish, who are commanded to come to the tent of meeting, but are commanded not to come having drunk wine and strong drink;

6) As to Moses' saying (in different order) (Shemoth 34:7) "He forgives transgression, offense, and sin, and absolves" and (Vayikra 16:21) "And he shall confess over it all the transgressions of the children of Israel, and all their offenses of all of their sins" — Once he confesses his transgressions and sins of rebellion, they are regarded as unwitting sins before Him.

6) "and he shall confess over it": verbal confession. How did he confess? "Ana Hashem, atone, I beseech You, for the sins, and for the transgressions, and for the offenses, which they have sinned, and transgressed, and offended before You, Your people, the house of Israel, as it is written in the Torah of Moses Your servant (Vayikra 16:30) 'For on this day He shall atone, etc.'" And they answer after him "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever."

6) R. Shimon b. Yehudah said in his (R. Shimon's) name: The kids of Rosh Chodesh atone for a tahor eating something unclean. Over and above them are those of the festivals, which atone for a tahor eating something unclean and for unawareness in the beginning and in the end. Over and above them are those of Yom Kippur, which atone for a tahor eating something unclean, for unawareness in the beginning and in the end, and for unawareness in the beginning and awareness in the end.

6) — Take what you have brought" (i.e., you cannot deduce more than you begin with — Just as there (the tent of meeting, etc.) only one (lustration is required), here, too, (you may derive) only one (and not two)! It must, therefore, be written (Shemoth 40:23) "and he shall take off the linen garments which he put on." Would it enter your mind that he could take off anything other than he put on? (Why, then, need this be stated?) It must be to liken taking off to putting on, viz.: Just as putting on requires lustration of hands and feet, so, taking off.

6) From here they ruled: They would carry them (the bullocks) on staves. When those in front went outside the wall of the azarah, and those in the rear had not yet done so, the first rendered their garments unclean, and the others did not do so until they, too, went outside.

6) — But then, why not say that just as "work" in respect to the tabernacle connotes finished work, here, too, it connotes finished work, i.e., that he should not write a scroll, and not weave a garment, and not make a whole sieve. Whence do I derive that he should not write two letters, and not weave two strands, and not make two holes in a sieve? From "all work."

6) "and he shall confess over it": verbal confession. How did he confess? "Ana Hashem, atone, I beseech You, for the sins, and for the transgressions, and for the offenses, which they have sinned, and transgressed, and offended before You, Your people, the house of Israel, as it is written in the Torah of Moses Your servant (Vayikra 16:30) 'For on this day He shall atone, etc.'" And they answer after him "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever."

6) Whence is it derived that just as another Cohein is readied to take his place in case he becomes disqualified, so, another woman is conditionally betrothed for him lest something happens to his wife? From (Vayikra 16:11) "And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house" — "his house" being his wife. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Yossi said to him: "If so, there is no end to the matter!"

6) Why is "linen" mentioned four times (in this verse)? To exclude four garments in respect to which it is written "before the L–rd." Because it is written of the choshen (the breastplate) (Shemoth 28:29) "And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the choshen of judgment upon his heart when he comes into the holy place as a remembrance before the L–rd always," I might think that he could enter with it (even) into the holy of holies"; it is, therefore, written "linen" — and not with the choshen.

6) As to Moses' saying (in different order) (Shemoth 34:7) "He forgives transgression, offense, and sin, and absolves" and (Vayikra 16:21) "And he shall confess over it all the transgressions of the children of Israel, and all their offenses of all of their sins" — Once he confesses his transgressions and sins of rebellion, they are regarded as unwitting sins before Him.

(Numb. 3:4:) “And they had no children.” R. Jacob bar Abin said in the name of R. Aha, “If they had had children, they would have taken precedence over Eleazar and Ithamar, since whoever takes precedence with respect to inheritance takes precedence with respect to honor, provided that he follows the behavior of his forebears.”⁵⁰PRK 26(27):10; Lev. R. 20:11; Numb. R. 2:26. (Ibid.:) “So Eleazar and Ithamar served as priests in the presence of ('al-pene) their father Aaron.” R. Isaac said, “During his lifetime”; but R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “At his death.” According to the opinion of R. Isaac, who said, “During his lifetime,” 'al-pene is mentioned here, and pene is also mentioned elsewhere (in Gen. 11:28), “And Haran died in the lifetime of ('al-pene) his father Terah.” If pene as used elsewhere (i.e., in Gen. 11:28) [means] during his lifetime, pene as used here (in Numb. 3:4) also [means] during his lifetime. According to the opinion of R. Hiyya bar Abba, who said, “At his death,” pene is used here (in Numb. 3:4) and pene is used elsewhere (in Gen. 23:3), “Then Abraham arose from beside ('al-pene) his dead (i.e., his dead wife).” If pene as used elsewhere (in Gen. 23:3) [means] at his death, pene as used here (in Numb. 3:4) also [means] at his death. Now according to the opinion of R. Isaac, who said, “during his lifetime,” [when] uncleanness befell Aaron, Eleazar ministered; [when] uncleanness befell Eleazar, Ithamar ministered. There is a story about Simeon ben Gimhit,⁵¹He was high priest in 17-18 C.E. that he went out to speak with the king of the Arabians.⁵²TYoma 4(3):20; yYoma 1:1 (38d); yMeg. 1:12(10) (72a); yHor. 3:3/5(2) (47d): Yoma 47a; ARN, A 35:4. When a streak of saliva squirted from [the king's] mouth onto his clothes and rendered him unclean, his brother Judah entered and ministered in the high priesthood in his place. That day Gimhit saw two of her sons as high priests. They said, “Gimhit had seven sons, and all of them ministered in the high priesthood.” The sages entered her home and said to her, “Tell us what good deeds you have to your credit?” She said to them, “By the Temple service, the rafters of my house have never seen the hair of my head.” They say, “All flours (qimhayya) are flour (qimhin), but the flour of Gimhit is fine flour.” In reference to her they read this verse (Ps. 45:14), “All glorious is the king's daughter within; her clothing is of gold brocade.” Now according to the opinion of R. Hiyya bar Abba, who said, “At his death,” when Aaron died, Eleazar ministered; when Eleazar died, Ithamar served in his place. R. Abba bar Abbina said, “For what reason is the parashah [about the death of] of Miriam (Numb. 20:1) near the parashah of the ashes of the [red] heifer (Numb. 19:1ff.)?⁵³PRK 26(27):11; Lev. R. 20:12; yYoma 1:1 (38b); MQ 28a. Simply to teach that just as the ashes of the [red] heifer atones, so does the death of the righteous atone.” R. Judan said, “For what reason is the death of Aaron (Deut. 10:6) near the breaking of the tablets (Deut. 9:17)? To teach that the death of the righteous is as grievous to the Holy One, blessed be He, as the breaking of the tablets.” R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “The sons of Aaron died on the first of Nisan.⁵⁴According to Lev. 10:1, they died at the time of the dedication of the Tabernacle; and according to Exod. 40:17, the dedication began with its erection on the first day of the first month, i.e., on the first of Abib, which came to be called Nisan. For what reason does it mention their death on the Day of Atonement (in Lev. 16:1)? It is simply to teach that, just as the Day of Atonement atones, so does the death of the righteous atone.” And where is it shown that the Day of Atonement atones? Where it is stated (in Lev. 16:30), “For on this day atonement shall be made for you to cleanse you.” And where it is shown that the death of the righteous atones? Where it is stated (in II Sam. 21:14), “Then they buried the bones of Saul […] and God responded to the plea of the land thereafter.”

R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “There are four things that the evil drive would refute [as irrational], and for each of them is written [the word,] huqqah (i.e., an unquestioned statute).⁸⁴Although Huqqah is normally translated simply as “statute,” the word more fully denotes a command that demands implicit and unquestioned obedience. Huqqah is therefore translated “unquestioned statute” throughout this section. Now these concern the following: (1) the nakedness of a brother's wife, (2) diverse kinds, (3) the scapegoat, and (4) the red heifer.”⁸⁵PR 14:12; Numb. R. 19:5; see Yoma 67b. In regard to the nakedness of a brother's wife, it is written (in Lev. 18:16), “You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother's wife”; [yet if the brother] dies without children [it is written] (in Deut. 25:5), “her brother-in-law shall have sexual intercourse with her [and take her for a wife].” And it is written about the sexual prohibitions (in Lev. 18:5), “And you shall keep [all] My unquestioned statutes [...].” In regard to diverse kinds, it is written (in Deut. 22:11), “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, [wool and flax together]”; yet a linen cloak⁸⁶Gk.: sindon. with [wool] tassels is permitted.⁸⁷See Numb. 15:37-38. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. [Thus it is written (in Lev. 19:19),] “You shall keep My unquestioned statute. You shall not mate your cattle with a different kind…, [nor shall you wear a garment with diverse kinds of interwoven stuff].” In regard to the scapegoat, it is written (in Lev. 16:26), “And the one who sets the azazel-goat free shall wash his clothes”; yet it is [the goat] itself that atones for others. And for [this commandment also] it is written (in Lev. 16:34), “And this shall be to you an unquestioned statute forever.” In regard to the red heifer, where is it shown? Since we are taught (in Parah 4:4), “All engaged with the [rite of the red] heifer from beginning to end render [their] garments unclean”; yet it is [the heifer] itself that purifies [what is] unclean. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Numb. 19:2), “This is an unquestioned statute of the Torah.”

(Numb. 3:4:) “And they had no children.” R. Jacob bar Abin said in the name of R. Aha, “If they had had children, they would have taken precedence over Eleazar and Ithamar, since whoever takes precedence with respect to inheritance takes precedence with respect to honor, provided that he follows the behavior of his forebears.”⁵⁰PRK 26(27):10; Lev. R. 20:11; Numb. R. 2:26. (Ibid.:) “So Eleazar and Ithamar served as priests in the presence of ('al-pene) their father Aaron.” R. Isaac said, “During his lifetime”; but R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “At his death.” According to the opinion of R. Isaac, who said, “During his lifetime,” 'al-pene is mentioned here, and pene is also mentioned elsewhere (in Gen. 11:28), “And Haran died in the lifetime of ('al-pene) his father Terah.” If pene as used elsewhere (i.e., in Gen. 11:28) [means] during his lifetime, pene as used here (in Numb. 3:4) also [means] during his lifetime. According to the opinion of R. Hiyya bar Abba, who said, “At his death,” pene is used here (in Numb. 3:4) and pene is used elsewhere (in Gen. 23:3), “Then Abraham arose from beside ('al-pene) his dead (i.e., his dead wife).” If pene as used elsewhere (in Gen. 23:3) [means] at his death, pene as used here (in Numb. 3:4) also [means] at his death. Now according to the opinion of R. Isaac, who said, “during his lifetime,” [when] uncleanness befell Aaron, Eleazar ministered; [when] uncleanness befell Eleazar, Ithamar ministered. There is a story about Simeon ben Gimhit,⁵¹He was high priest in 17-18 C.E. that he went out to speak with the king of the Arabians.⁵²TYoma 4(3):20; yYoma 1:1 (38d); yMeg. 1:12(10) (72a); yHor. 3:3/5(2) (47d): Yoma 47a; ARN, A 35:4. When a streak of saliva squirted from [the king's] mouth onto his clothes and rendered him unclean, his brother Judah entered and ministered in the high priesthood in his place. That day Gimhit saw two of her sons as high priests. They said, “Gimhit had seven sons, and all of them ministered in the high priesthood.” The sages entered her home and said to her, “Tell us what good deeds you have to your credit?” She said to them, “By the Temple service, the rafters of my house have never seen the hair of my head.” They say, “All flours (qimhayya) are flour (qimhin), but the flour of Gimhit is fine flour.” In reference to her they read this verse (Ps. 45:14), “All glorious is the king's daughter within; her clothing is of gold brocade.” Now according to the opinion of R. Hiyya bar Abba, who said, “At his death,” when Aaron died, Eleazar ministered; when Eleazar died, Ithamar served in his place. R. Abba bar Abbina said, “For what reason is the parashah [about the death of] of Miriam (Numb. 20:1) near the parashah of the ashes of the [red] heifer (Numb. 19:1ff.)?⁵³PRK 26(27):11; Lev. R. 20:12; yYoma 1:1 (38b); MQ 28a. Simply to teach that just as the ashes of the [red] heifer atones, so does the death of the righteous atone.” R. Judan said, “For what reason is the death of Aaron (Deut. 10:6) near the breaking of the tablets (Deut. 9:17)? To teach that the death of the righteous is as grievous to the Holy One, blessed be He, as the breaking of the tablets.” R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “The sons of Aaron died on the first of Nisan.⁵⁴According to Lev. 10:1, they died at the time of the dedication of the Tabernacle; and according to Exod. 40:17, the dedication began with its erection on the first day of the first month, i.e., on the first of Abib, which came to be called Nisan. For what reason does it mention their death on the Day of Atonement (in Lev. 16:1)? It is simply to teach that, just as the Day of Atonement atones, so does the death of the righteous atone.” And where is it shown that the Day of Atonement atones? Where it is stated (in Lev. 16:30), “For on this day atonement shall be made for you to cleanse you.” And where it is shown that the death of the righteous atones? Where it is stated (in II Sam. 21:14), “Then they buried the bones of Saul […] and God responded to the plea of the land thereafter.”

R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “There are four things that the evil drive would refute [as irrational], and for each of them is written [the word,] huqqah (i.e., an unquestioned statute).⁸⁴Although Huqqah is normally translated simply as “statute,” the word more fully denotes a command that demands implicit and unquestioned obedience. Huqqah is therefore translated “unquestioned statute” throughout this section. Now these concern the following: (1) the nakedness of a brother's wife, (2) diverse kinds, (3) the scapegoat, and (4) the red heifer.”⁸⁵PR 14:12; Numb. R. 19:5; see Yoma 67b. In regard to the nakedness of a brother's wife, it is written (in Lev. 18:16), “You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother's wife”; [yet if the brother] dies without children [it is written] (in Deut. 25:5), “her brother-in-law shall have sexual intercourse with her [and take her for a wife].” And it is written about the sexual prohibitions (in Lev. 18:5), “And you shall keep [all] My unquestioned statutes [...].” In regard to diverse kinds, it is written (in Deut. 22:11), “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, [wool and flax together]”; yet a linen cloak⁸⁶Gk.: sindon. with [wool] tassels is permitted.⁸⁷See Numb. 15:37-38. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. [Thus it is written (in Lev. 19:19),] “You shall keep My unquestioned statute. You shall not mate your cattle with a different kind…, [nor shall you wear a garment with diverse kinds of interwoven stuff].” In regard to the scapegoat, it is written (in Lev. 16:26), “And the one who sets the azazel-goat free shall wash his clothes”; yet it is [the goat] itself that atones for others. And for [this commandment also] it is written (in Lev. 16:34), “And this shall be to you an unquestioned statute forever.” In regard to the red heifer, where is it shown? Since we are taught (in Parah 4:4), “All engaged with the [rite of the red] heifer from beginning to end render [their] garments unclean”; yet it is [the heifer] itself that purifies [what is] unclean. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Numb. 19:2), “This is an unquestioned statute of the Torah.”

You shall not take": What is the intent of this? (Leviticus 19:12) "You shall not swear falsely in My name" speaks only of swearing. Whence is it derived that it is also forbidden to take it upon oneself to swear? From "You shall not take the name of the L rd your G d in vain." So long as you do not take it upon yourself to swear I am your G d, (tempering justice with mercy.) Once you take it upon yourself to swear, I am your "Judge" (connoting absolute justice). For it is written (Exodus 34:7) "and cleanse He will not cleanse." It cannot be said that he will not be cleansed (at all), for it is written "and cleanse," and it cannot be said that he will be (entirely) cleansed for it is written "He will not cleanse." The meaning must perforce be that He cleanses those who repent, and He does not cleanse those who do not repent. I might think that here, too, (in the instance of a vain oath) the same obtains. It is, therefore, written (Ibid. 20:7) "for the L rd will not cleanse, etc." Because of (the following) four things R. Mattia b. Charash went to R. Elazar b. Hakappar in Ludia. He said to him: My master, did you hear of the four divisions of atonement expounded by R. Yishmael? He answered: One verse states (Jeremiah 3:14) "Repent, you wayward sons" — which indicates that penitence atones. Another verse states (Leviticus 16:30) "On this day, atonement will be made for you" — which indicates that Yom Kippur atones. One verse states (Psalms 89:33) "I will punish their offense with the rod, and their transgression with plagues" — which indicates that afflictions atone. And another verse states (Isaiah 22:14) "This transgression will not be forgiven you until you die" — which indicates that death atones. How are these four verses to be reconciled? If one transgresses a positive commandment and repents, he "does not move from there" until he is forgiven. And of this it is written "Repent, you wayward sons." If one transgresses a negative commandment and repents, there is no power in penitence to atone; but penitence suspends (punishment) and Yom Kippur atones. And of this it is written "On this day atonement will be made for you." If one willfully transgresses (sins punishable by) krithuth (cutting-off) and judicial death penalty and repents, there is no power in penitence to suspend, but penitence and Yom Kippur atone for one half, and afflictions purge and atone for the other half. And of this it is written "I will punish their offense with the rod, and their transgression with plagues." If one desecrates the name of heaven and repents, there is no power in penitence to suspend or on Yom Kippur to atone, or in afflictions alone to purge. But penitence, Yom Kippur, and afflictions suspend, and the day of death purges. And of this it is written ("This transgression will not be forgiven you) until you die." And (I Samuel 3:14) "The transgression of the house of Eli will not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering." It is not atoned for by sacrifice or offering, but it is atoned for by death. Rebbi says: I used to think that they day of death does not atone, but (Ezekiel 37:13) "when I open your graves (and take you out of your graves, etc.") indicates that the day of death does atone. Rebbi says: For everything from "You shall not take the name" and down, penitence does atone. From "You shall not take the name" and up, including "You shall not take the name," penitence suspends and Yom Kippur atones. And which is from "You shall not take the name" and down? A positive commandment and a negative commandment, aside from "You shall not take the name." (Which is) from "You shall not take the name" and up? Transgressions punishable by judicial death penalty, death at the hands of Heaven, kareth, forty lashes, sin-offerings and guilt-offerings, and "You shall not take the name" among them.

R. Mani of Sha'av and R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi: Aaron's sons died because of four things, and < a sentence of > death is recorded in connection with all of them.⁴⁷PRK 26 (27):9; Lev. R. 20:9. Because they entered and had drunk wine, and it says (in Lev. 10:9): DRINK NO WINE OR INTOXICATING LIQUOR…, LEST YOU DIE. Because they entered without washing hands and feet, and it says (in Exod. 30:20): WHEN THEY COME UNTO THE TENT OF MEETING, THEY SHALL WASH WITH WATER LEST THEY DIE. Because they entered while lacking < the proper > clothes. And what did they lack? R. Levi said: They were lacking a robe, and < a sentence of > death is recorded in connection with < that lack >, where it is stated (in Exod. 28:35): AND IT (the robe with golden bells and pomegranates) SHALL BE UPON AARON FOR OFFICIATING, SO THAT THE SOUND OF IT SHALL BE HEARD, < WHEN HE COMES INTO THE SANCTUARY >…, [LEST HE DIE]. And because they had no children, and < a sentence of > death is recorded in connection with < that lack >, where it is stated (in Numb. 3:4): BUT NADAB AND ABIHU DIED…; AND THEY HAD NO CHILDREN. Abba Hanan says: Because they had no wives, and it is recorded (in Lev. 16:6): AND HE SHALL MAKE ATONEMENT FOR HIMSELF AND FOR HIS HOUSEHOLD. R. Levi said: They had a lot of arrogance and were saying: Which woman is worthy of us?⁴⁸Lev. R. 20:10; below, Lev. 6:13. A lot of women were remaining unmarried and waiting for them. But they were saying: Our father is high priest, our father's brother is prince, < and > we are deputy high priests. Which woman is worthy of us? R. Menahama [said] in the name of R. Joshua bar Hanina: < It is > about them < that > it says (in Ps. 78:63): FIRE DEVOURED THEIR YOUNG MEN, AND THEIR MAIDENS HAD NO NUPTIAL SONG. Why had FIRE DEVOURED THEIR YOUNG MEN? Because of THEIR MAIDENS, who HAD NO NUPTIAL SONG. And moreover, < their arrogance may be inferred > from this (i.e., from Exod. 24:1): THEN HE SAID UNTO MOSES: GO UP UNTO THE LORD, YOU AND AARON, NADAB AND ABIHU, < AND THE SEVENTY ELDERS OF ISRAEL >. This teaches that Moses and Aaron walked first, while Nadab and Abihu came after them; but still they were saying: These two old men shall die, and we shall assume authority over the community in their place.⁴⁹See below, Lev. 6:13. {R. Ayyevu said:} [R. Judan said in the name of R. Ayyevu:] They said it to each other with their mouths, < while > R. Pinhas said: they pondered it in their hearts. R. Berekhyah said: The Holy One said to them (in Prov. 27:1): DO NOT BOAST OF TOMORROW…. A lot of colts have died, and their skins have been made into coverings for their mother's backs. And in addition < their arrogance may be inferred > from this (i.e., from Exod. 24:11): BUT HE (i.e., the Holy One) STILL DID NOT RAISE HIS HAND AGAINST THE NOBLES OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. From here < it follows > that they deserved to have a hand raised < against them >. R. Hosha'ya said: Did cellaria⁵⁰The word is Latin. (i.e., provisions) go up with them to Sinai, since it says (ibid., cont.): THEY BEHELD GOD, < AND THEY ATE AND DRANK >. It is simply that they feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence. < They were > like someone who beholds his colleague in the midst of eating and drinking. R. Johanan said: < There was > actual eating [and drinking], since it is written (in Prov. 16:15): IN THE LIGHT OF THE KING'S FACE THERE IS LIFE. R. Tanhuma said: < Exod. 24:11 > teaches that they became bold in their hearts and stood on their feet, < while > they feasted their eyes on the Divine Presence. R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi: Moses did not feast his eyes on the Divine Presence, as stated (in Exod. 3:6): MOSES HID HIS FACE…. And in addition, < the boldness of Aaron's sons may be inferred > from this (i.e., from Numb. 3:4): BUT NADAB AND ABIHU DIED BEFORE THE LORD. Was it BEFORE THE LORD that they died? < The verse > simply teaches that it is grievous for the Omnipresent when children of righteous people pass away during their < parents' > lifetime.

R. Samuel the son of Nahmani said that R. Jonathan stated: Whoever rebukes his companion for religious reasons earns a share of divine grace, as it is said: He that rebuketh a man shall in the end find more favor (Prov. 28:23). And furthermore a thread of divine favors will be drawn about him, as is said: He shall find favor. Scripture says: Mine ordinance shall ye do (Lev. 18:4). These are ordinances which, if they were not enumerated in the Torah, ought to have been. Scripture is speaking here of idolatry and blasphemy. My statutes shall ye keep, to walk therein (ibid.). These are the commandments against which the evil inclination contends, and against which the peoples of the earth rebel. These are: the wearing of garments made of wool and linen,¹²The law of shatnez; see Lev. 19:19. This commandment and all the following ones are disregarded as irrational by non-Jews. the eating of pig,¹³See Lev. 11:7. the spittle of a childless sister-in-law,¹⁴After one has refused to marry his brother’s widow under the law of levirate marriage; see Deut. 25:5–10. mixing seeds,¹⁵Deut. 22:9–11. stoning an ox for killing a human being,¹⁶Exod. 21:29. the heifer whose neck was broken,¹⁷Lev. 14:1–21. the bird sacrifice brought by a leper,¹⁷ a firstling of an ass,¹⁸Exod. 13:13. meat prepared in milk,¹⁹Exod. 23:9. and the goat that has been sent away (the scapegoat).²⁰Lev. 16:1–34. Azazel, the area where the scapegoat would perish. You might maintain that these are unimportant prohibitions. Hence Scripture says: I am the Lord: I have decreed them, and you art not permitted to repudiate them.

7) How long must it be kept alive? Until the sprinkling of the blood of its mate. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon says: Until he makes atonement over it, as it is written "to make atonement over it," atonement through its body. "to send it": so that if the blood were spilled out, the scape-goat is to die. If the scape-goat dies, the blood is to be spilled out.

7) And anything which leaves the sanctuary to be placed outside it is placed on what is near it (the entrance) outside.

7) Let us see what it most closely resembles. We derive "above" from "above," and we do not derive "above" from "below." — But perhaps go in this direction: We derive the blood of the bullock from the blood of the bullock, and we do not derive the blood of the bullock from the blood of the he-goat! It is, therefore, written "and he shall do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bullock." Let "as he did" not be stated. Why is it stated? (To stress) that all of its "doings" are to be alike. Just as the blood of the bullock — "seven below," so, the blood of the he-goat. And just as the blood of the he-goat — "one above," so, the blood of the bullock.

7) (Vayikra 16:18) ("And he shall go out to the altar which is before the L–rd, and make atonement upon it. And he shall take of the blood of the bullock and of the blood of the he-goat, and he shall place it upon the corners of the altar roundabout.") "And he shall go out to the altar which is before the L–rd": What is the intent of this? (i.e., Is he not already standing in the sanctuary, where the golden altar is found?) R. Nechemiah answered: Because we find in respect to the bullock that is brought for all the mitzvoth (i.e., the bullock of the anointed priest) that the Cohein stands outside (i.e., at the far end of) the altar and sprinkles upon the curtain, I might think that the same applies here. It is, therefore, written "And he shall go out to (the far end of) the altar." Where was he, (then, until now)? On the inside of the altar (before the curtain).

7) but those who are blemished, who are not commanded to come, are not commanded not to come having drunk wine — here, too, (we would say that) the commanded (to come, i.e., Aaron) is commanded (not to come at all times, but not the sons, who are not commanded to come.) It is, therefore, written ("Speak to Aaron) your brother." Let "your brother" not be stated. Why is it stated? To include the sons.

7) This tells me (that he confesses) only their definite sins. Whence do I derive (that he also confesses) their possible sins, their sins by constraint, and their unwitting sins? From "all" in respect to "transgressions," "offenses," and "sins." I might think that (sins liable to) sin-offerings and guilt-offerings are included among them. It is, therefore, written "them" — "them on the head of the he-goat," and not (sins liable to) sin-offerings and guilt-offerings on the head of the he-goat.

7) They asked him: May this be offered up for the other? He answered: Yes. They asked: If so, let those of Yom Kippur be offered on Rosh Chodesh, but how can those of Rosh Chodesh be offered on Yom Kippur for an atonement which is not of their kind? He answered: They all come to atone for defiling the sanctuary and its holy objects.

7) (Vayikra 16:23) "and he shall leave them there": We are hereby taught that they require genizah ("secreting," not to be used again). R. Yossi says: They may be used by an ordinary Cohein (in the course of the year). What, then, is the intent of "and he shall leave them there"? That he (the high-priest) does not use them for another Yom Kippur.

7) "and they shall burn in fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung": "skin, flesh, and dung" is written here, and it is written elsewhere (Vayikra 4:11), re the anointed Cohein). Just as there, (the animal is first cut into pieces, here, too.

7) This tells me only of (the ban on) mundane work. Whence do I derive the same for the work (involved in performing) a mitzvah — that he should not write two letters in (holy) scrolls, tefillin, and mezuzoth, and that he should not weave two strands in the breeches (of the priestly vestments) and in the curtain (in the tabernacle)? From "all work."

7) Whence is derived the donning of other (linen) vestments at dusk (for the removal of the incense ladle and the coal pan)? From "and he shall put on the linen garments." "the holy garments": This is an archetype (binyan av) for all the linen garments, that they must come from Temple funds.

7) Because it is written of the ephod (Shemoth 28:12) "And Aaron shall bear their names (on the ephod) before the L–rd on his two shoulders as a remembrance," I might think that he could enter with it (even) into the holy of holies; it is, therefore, written "linen" — and not with the ephod.

(Lev. 16:1:) “Now the Lord spoke unto Moses after the death [of Aaron's two sons].” This is what Elihu said (to Job 37:1), “At this also my heart trembles and leaps.” Elihu was observing how the sons of Aaron went in to sacrifice and came out destroyed by fire.⁵⁵Cf. PRK 26(27):5; Lev. R. 20:5. He was amazed and said (ibid.), “At this also my heart trembles and leaps.” What did he see for him to say this? He said, “At a time when the priesthood had become weak in the hand of Aaron, what is written there (in Numb. 17:21)? ‘Then Moses spoke unto the Children of Israel; and their princes gave him a staff, a staff for each prince.’ So he wrote the name of each and every tribe on its staff. He also wrote the name of Aaron on the staff of Levi and put it in the middle, lest the Children of Israel say, ‘It smelled the Divine Presence and bore fruit.’ Moses said, ‘See, I am putting it in the middle so as not to give a pretext,’ as stated (in Numb. 17:21, cont.), ‘and the staff of Aaron was in the midst of their staffs.’ What is written there (in vs. 22-23)? ‘Then Moses placed the staffs before the Lord in the tent of the testimony. And it was on the morrow that Moshe came to the tent of testimony, and the staff of Aaron had sprouted […] and had borne almonds.’ The scriptural text lacked nothing. Why then, ‘and had born (rt.: gml) almonds (rt.: shqd)?’⁵⁶Numb. R. 18:23. It repaid (rt.: gml) anyone who was bent on (rt.: shqd) evil against the tribe of Levi. So while (in Numb. 17:16-24) even dry pieces of wood emitted an aroma among those who live in the world, sprouted blossoms, came out alive, and produced fruits; [yet] the sons of Aaron, who entered there alive, came out destroyed by fire.” So when Elihu beheld the one and the other, he said (in Job 37:1), “At this also my heart trembles.” When? (Lev. 16:1:) “Now the Lord spoke unto Moses after the death of Aaron's two sons.” As [all] four of [Aaron's sons] deserved to die; but Moses prayed for them, and his prayer produced half [a response]. When? When Israel made the calf, what is written there (in Deut. 9:20)? “And the Lord was very angry with Aaron to destroy (rt.: shmd) him.” Destruction (rt.: shmd) can only be annihilation of children. Thus it is stated (in Amos 2:9), “I destroyed (rt.: shmd) their (the Amorites') fruit above […].” When Moses prayed, his prayer produced half [a response]. (Lev. 16:1:) “After the death of Aaron's two sons.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Aaron, did I not write this in My Torah (in Exod. 22:8), ‘In every case of misappropriation, whether for a bull, for an ass or for a sheep….’ Do you not remember what you did with the bull, as stated (in Ps. 106:20), ‘Thus they exchanged their glory for the image of a bull?’”⁵⁷See Numb. R. 9:47. For alternate interpretations of Exod. 22:8 that use the same form, see BQ 54b. (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “For an ass.” This refers to the Egyptians, about whom it is written (in Ezek. 23:20), “whose flesh is like the flesh of asses.” They (the Egyptians among them) made for them a calf, whom Israel worshiped, as stated (in Numb. 11:4), “Then the rabble⁵⁸I.e., the Egyptians who joined Israel in the Exodus. which was in their midst.” (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “For a sheep (seh).” This refers to Israel, as stated (in Jer. 50:17), “Israel is a scattered flock (seh).” (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “For a garment,” [i.e.] that one about which it is written (in Is. 3:6), “you have a garment; you shall be our leader.”⁵⁹According to Numb. R. 9:47, the allusion is to Israel having made the golden calf their king. (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “Or any loss,” since it is written of them (i.e., of Israel in Jer. 50:6), “My people were lost sheep.” (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “Of which one says, ‘This is it.” [This refers to] them when they said (in Exod. 32:8), “These are your gods, O Israel.” (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “The case of both parties shall come before God (the powers).” This refers to Moses of whom it is written (in Exod. 7:1), “See, I have set you as a power to Pharaoh,” [in that] Moses sat in judgment over them. (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “The one whom God (the powers) condemns.” This refers to the judges.⁶⁰See above, Exod. 2:1, and the note there. (Exod. 22:8, cont.:) “Shall pay his neighbor double.” This refers to the two sons of Aaron. Ergo (in Lev. 16:1), “after the death of Aaron's two sons.”

“We have a little sister, and she has no breasts. What shall we do for our sister on the day that she will be spoken for?” (Song of Songs 8:8).
“We have a little sister” – this is Israel. Rabbi Azarya [said] in the name of Rabbi Yehuda bar Rabbi Simon: In the future, all the princes of the nations of the world are destined to come and denounce Israel before the Holy One blessed be He and say, ‘Master of the universe, these engaged in idol worship and those engaged in idol worship; these engaged in licentiousness and those engaged in licentiousness; these shed blood and those shed blood. Why, then, are these descending into Gehenna and those are not descending?’²¹The nations of the world will ask why they are going to Gehenna and Israel is not, given that they behaved similarly. The Holy One blessed be He will say to them: ‘“We have a little sister” – just as with a child, no matter what he does no one reprimands him; why? Because he is a child. Similarly, to whatever extent Israel is tainted by their iniquities all the days of the year, Yom Kippur comes and atones for them, as it is stated: “For on this day He shall atone for you”’ (Leviticus 16:30).

(Lev. 14:5:) < THEN THE PRIEST SHALL GIVE A COMMAND > TO KILL ONE BIRD. Why kill one and release one? It is simply that, if he has repented, you (sic) should not see < the leprosy > again; but if you do not repent (hozer), the leprosy shall return (hozer) upon you, just as the live bird can return. Therefore (in vs. 7): AND HE SHALL SEND THE < LIVE > BIRD OUT < OVER THE OPEN COUNTRY >.²⁸Cf. Lev. 16:9.

(Fol. 85b) MISHNAH: He who says, "I will sin, repent, sin again, and repent again," will have no opportunity to repent. If one says, "I will sin, and the Day of Atonement will atone for my sins," the Day of Atonement will bring no atonement for him. [Only] sins affecting the relation of man to God, the Day of Atonement atones for: but, sins affecting the relation of man to his fellow-man is not atoned for by the Day of Atonement until he appeases his fellow-man. This R. Elazar expounded (Lev. 16, 30) From all your sins before the Lord shall ye be clean; i,e. "Sins affecting the relation of man to God, the Day of Atonement atones for; but sins affecting the relation of man to his fellow-man, the Day of Atonment cannot atone for until his fellow-man has been appeased. "Happy are ye, OIsrael," remarked R. Akiba: "Before whom do you cleanse yourselves, and who cleanses you? Your Father, who is in Heaven! for it is said (Ez. 36, 25) There will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean; and there is also another passage (Jer. 17, 13) The hope (Mikvah) of Israel is the Lord; i.e., just as a ritual bath of purification (Mikvah) purifies the unclean, so also does the Holy One, praised be He! cleanse Israel."

(Fol. 86) R. Mathia b. Cheresh asked R. Elazar b. Azariah of Rome: "Have you heard of the four kinds of atonement, about which R. Ishmael expounded?" "There are only three," replied he, "for penitence, the fourth one, is combined with each of them. When one has transgressed a positive commandment, and repents before he leaves the place [of transgression] he is forgiven, as it is said (Jer. 3, 22) Return O backsliding children, I will heal your backslidings. If he has transgressed a prohibitive commandment, and offers repentance, his repentance causes the suspension of sentence, and penitence on the Day of Atonement forgives, as it is said (Lev. 16, 30) For on that day shall He make atonement for you, to cleanse you from, all your sins. If he has committed sins for which the penalties are Karoth, or death by Beth Din, then Penitence together with the Day of Atonement suspends [the sentence in Heaven] and afflictions finish the atonement, as it is said (Ps. 89, 33)Then will I visit with the rod their transgressions, and with plagues their iniquity. But he who has on his conscience the defamation of the name of the Lord, penitence cannot suspend, nor can the Day of Atonement atone for, nor will affliction end, his punishment; but all three together only suspend sentence, and death completes the atonement; as it is said (Is. 22, 14) And it was revealed in my ears by the Lord of hosts: Surely this iniquity shall not be forgiven unto you, until ye die."

"I will sin, the Day of Atonement will atone for." Shall we assume that our Mishnah is not in accord with Rabbi? For we are taught in a Baraitha that Rabbi said: For all the sins mentioned in the Bible, [whether one has repented or not], the Day of Atonement atones. The Mishnah may agree with the opinion of Rabbi, but if a person sins, relying [on the Day of Atonement to atone for him], it is different. R. Joseph b. Chabu pointed out the following contradiction to R. Abahu: We are taught that the Day of Atonement does not atone for the sins against men until he appeases them, for it is written (Lev. 16, 30) From all your sins before the Lord shall ye be clean. Behold it is written (Sam. 2, 25) If one man sins against another, God will forgive him when he will pray. The word Elohim (God) refers here to the judge. If so, then how will you explain the last part of the passage: If against the Lord a man should sin, who shall judge him? [Cannot God himself judge him?] We must therefore say it means this: If one sins against a man, and appeases him, God forgives him; but if he sins against God, who can pray for him? Only repentance and good deeds.

8) "to Azazel": to the "hardest" (az) place in the mountains. I might think in a settled area; it is, therefore, written "to the desert." And whence is it derived that it must be on a peak? From (Vayikra 16:22) "to the land of gezeirah" (lit., "cutting").

8) "and his full handfuls of incense of spices ground small": the taller (high-priest) relative to his size, and the shorter, relative to his (i.e., there is no absolute measure for the handful.) And this (an exact handful) was its size. "incense": to be (supplied) from communal funds. "spices": (all of the eleven) spices (enumerated in Shemoth, Ki Tissa) to be contained therein. "ground small": What is the intent of this? Is it not already written (Shemoth 30:26) "And you shall crush it fine? Why, then, "ground small"? That it be ground extra fine.

8) — But perhaps we are speaking of the outer altar (that he goes out to from the sanctuary)! (This is not to be entertained, for) it is written "which is before the L–rd," which can apply only to the inner altar.

8) "and let him not come": on Yom Kippur. "at all times": to include the other days of the year. R. Eliezer said: (Why is a verse necessary for this?) Does it not follow a fortiori? viz.: If he (the high-priest), on the day that he is commanded to come (i.e., on Yom Kippur), he is commanded not to come (on the other times of that day [i.e., those times not specified for sacred service]), then, on a day that he is not commanded to come (i.e., the other days of the year), how much more so is he commanded not to come (at all times)! — No, this is refuted by the instance of Yisrael, who are commanded to come on the festivals and who are commanded not to come empty-handed,

8) From here they ruled: (Offerings of) definite liability for sin-offerings or guilt-offerings, which Yom Kippur passed by, must be brought after Yom Kippur; and suspended guilt-offerings (for possibility of having transgressed) are exempt. "and he shall send them by the hand of a man": even one who is not a Cohein. "appointed": that he be readied (the preceding day). "appointed": even on the Sabbath. "appointed": even if he is in a state of uncleanliness.

8) "to Azazel": to the "hardest" (az) place in the mountains. I might think in a settled area; it is, therefore, written "to the desert." And whence is it derived that it must be on a peak? From (Vayikra 16:22) "to the land of gezeirah" (lit., "cutting").

8) And for willful defiling of the sanctuary and its holy objects the kid presented within and Yom Kippur atone. And for the other transgressions of the Torah: light and stringent, willful and unwitting, known and unknown, positive commandment and negative commandment, krithoth and judicial death penalties, the sent-away kid atones. (See Mishnayoth Shevuoth 1:2-1:6)

8) "And he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place": In the Beth Haparvah quarter (in the south of the azarah). And five immersions took place there on that day, all in the holy (area) of the Beth Haparvah — aside from the first that he performed (for the slaughtering of the tamid) every day at the Water Gate. (Vayikra 16:24) "and he shall go out and offer up his burnt-offering and the burnt-offering of the people, and he shall make atonement for himself and for the people.": His burnt-offering precedes that of the people, and his atonement precedes that of the people.

8) "And he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place": In the Beth Haparvah quarter (in the south of the azarah). And five immersions took place there on that day, all in the holy (area) of the Beth Haparvah — aside from the first that he performed (for the slaughtering of the tamid) every day at the Water Gate. (Vayikra 16:24) "and he shall go out and offer up his burnt-offering and the burnt-offering of the people, and he shall make atonement for himself and for the people.": His burnt-offering precedes that of the people, and his atonement precedes that of the people.

8) I might think that if she miscarries an unarticulated head or an unarticulated body or two backs or two spines, since they have a human form, she becomes unclean; it is, therefore, written "she shall be unclean seven days … and on the eighth day he shall circumcise." Just as this betokens what is fit for the creation of a soul, (so there is included all of this kind) — to exclude the above, which are not fit for the creation of a soul. "and she shall be unclean": she and not the child. For (without this stipulation), it would follow otherwise, viz.: If, because of the child, which (only) contributed to her tumah, she becomes tamei, then the child itself which effected the tumah, how much more so should it be tamei! — No, this is refuted by the sent-away he-goat (of Yom Kippur), which causes tumah (viz. Vayikra 16:26), but it itself is clean. — No, this may be so with the sent-away he-goat, which is not subject to tumah in and of itself (in its lifetime). Would you say the same of the child, which is subject to tumah in and of itself? Since it is subject to tumah, it should be tamei (in birth)! It must, therefore, be written "she shall be unclean," and not the child.

8) "And he who burns": not he who lights the fire, and not he who arranges the wood pile. And who is "He who burns"? He who tends (the fire) at the burning (of the bullock). I might think that it renders clothing unclean even after it has been reduced to ashes. It is, therefore, written ("And he who burns) them." They (when they are intact) render clothing unclean; but he who burns them when they have been reduced to ashes does not render (his clothing) unclean. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon says: They do not render clothing unclean until the fire has "taken" in the greater part of them. (And he also says:) "them" (i.e., only when they are intact, do they render clothing unclean.) But if the flesh has been cut into pieces, he who burns them does not render his clothing unclean.

8) This tells me only of work which is liable to (the penalty of) kareth. Whence do I derive the same for work that is not liable to kareth? — that one letter not be written, that one strand not be woven, that one hole not be made in a sieve? From "all work."

8) (Vayikra 16:33) ("And he shall make atonement for the sanctity of the holy place. And for the tent of meeting and for the altar shall he make atonement. And for the Cohanim and for all the people of the congregation shall he make atonement.") "And he shall make atonement for the sanctity of the holy place" — this is the holy of holies; "the tent of meeting" — this is the sanctuary; "the altar" — as the term implies; "shall he make atonement" — also for the azaroth (the Temple courts); "the Cohanim" — as the term implies; "the people of the congregation" — these are the Israelites; "shall he make atonement" —- also for the Levites. They are all subsumed in one atonement. We are hereby taught that they are (all) atoned for by the sent-away he-goat. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon says: Just as the blood of the he-goat, which is applied within, atones for Israel (without confession), so the blood of the bullock atones for the Cohanim. Just as the confession over the sent-away he-goat atones for Israel, so the confession over the bullock atones for the Cohanim.

8) Because it is written of the robe (me'il) (Shemoth 28:35) "And it shall be upon Aaron to minister; and its sound shall be heard when he comes to the holy place before the L–rd," I might think that he could enter with it (even) into the holy of holies; it is, therefore, written "linen" — and not with the me'il.

(Lev. 15:25:) “And when a woman has had a discharge of blood for many days.” Why a woman and not a man? Previously it applied to men and women. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 15:2), “When any man has a discharge issuing from his flesh.” R. Meir says, “The man's uncleanness was more serious than the woman's uncleanness. Why? Because the uncleanness of women is a sign of children; however, that of a man is [a sign] of suffering. Thus it is stated (in vs. 3), ‘And this shall be the uncleanness in his discharge,’³⁴The next verses (4-12) stress just how defiling his discharge really is. [i.e.] something which seals and closes.” Previously the men saw water, until Rachel arose and said (in Gen. 31:35), “for the period of women is upon me.” Then it was given to her. Therefore (in Exod. 15:25), “And when a woman has had a discharge of blood.” (Lev. 15:25:) “And when a woman has had a discharge of blood for many days.” Thus have our masters taught (in Shab. 2:6): Women die at the time of their childbirth for three transgressions:³⁵Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 2:1; Tanh., Gen. 2:1. Because they have not been careful in regard to menstruation, in regard to the hallah,³⁶I.e., the priest’s share of the dough. and in regard to the lighting of the lamp.³⁷I.e., the Sabbath lamp. Why at the time of their childbirth? Because the adversary (Satan) only makes accusations³⁸Gk.: kategorein. in time of danger. Now the three of them are from the Torah. [Where is it shown about] menstruation? (Lev. 15:25:) “And when a woman has had a discharge of her blood.” [Where is it shown about] the hallah? (Numb. 15:20:) “[You shall set aside] the first of your dough as a hallah offering.” [Where is it shown] in regard to the lighting of the [Sabbath] lamp? As our masters taught, “Where is it shown that a person is to be zealous and diligent in the lighting of the [Sabbath] lamp? Where it is stated (in Is. 58:13), ‘and you call the Sabbath a delight.’ This refers to the lighting of the lamp.” And why were [these commandments] transmitted to the woman?³⁹Gen. R. 17:8; yShab. 2:4 (5b). The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “She extinguished the lamp of the world….” In regard to menstruation, the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “She shed the blood of Adam, and she was sentenced to have her own blood shed, since it is stated (in Gen. 9:6), ‘Whoever sheds human blood [by a human will his blood be shed].’ She shall observe her menstrual period to atone for the blood that she shed.” Ergo (in Lev. 15:25), “And when a woman has had a discharge of blood.” Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, compares the uncleanness of Israel to the uncleanness of the menstrual period, when [a woman] is unclean and [then] purified. So the Holy One, blessed be He, is going to purify Israel, as stated (in Ezek. 36:25), “I will sprinkle pure water upon you, and you shall be pure.” Another interpretation: (Ezek. 36:17:) “Their way before Me was like the uncleanness of a menstruant woman”; like the uncleanness of a menstruant woman, and not like the uncleanness of a corpse. With a corpse in the house, a high priest does not enter there; but in the case of a menstruant woman, a high priest enters into the house with her and sits [with her] on the couch,⁴⁰‘YSTWW’, probably from the Gk.: histion, which means “something woven.” but on condition that it not shake (when they sit on it). So if Israel were compared to the impurity of death, the Divine Presence would never return upon them; however, they are compared to the menstruant because there is cleansing for her in a mikveh, so that the priest may be with her in the house and not be afraid. Thus the Divine Presence dwells with Israel, even though they are unclean, as stated (in Lev. 16:16), “which dwells with them in the midst of their uncleannesses.” R. Levy said, “When Israel was in Egypt, the women did not see menstrual blood, because the fear of Egypt was upon them. And also after Israel left Egypt, they did not see menstruation in the desert, because the Divine Presence was among them.” [Moreover,] the women accepted the Torah first. It is so stated (in Exod. 19:3), “Thus shall you say to the House of Jacob,” these are the women;⁴¹Exod. R. 28:2. Cf. Shab. 118b: “R. Jose said, ‘… but my wife [I called] my house.’” (ibid., cont.), “and declare to the sons of Israel,” these are the men. And so it says (in Cant. 6:10), “terrible⁴²Buber, n. 91, points out that ‘ayummah (TERRIBLE) is seen as related to ‘emah (“fear”), in that the fear of the Divine Presence was upon them. like bannered hosts.” Now about them it is stated (in Cant. 4:12), “A locked garden is my sister, my bride, a locked fountain, a sealed spring.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, “In this world you became clean but returned to uncleanness; but in the world to come I Myself will cleanse you so that you shall not ever become unclean.” Thus it is stated (in Ezek. 36:25), “I will sprinkle pure water upon you, and you shall be pure; I will purify you from all your uncleannesses and from all your idols.”

Wisdoms have built her house (Proverbs 9:1): This is the Torah that has created all of the worlds; it hewed out pillars seven which is hewed from the seven firmaments and given to people. Another [understanding] - Wisdoms have built her house: The Holy One, blessed be He said, "If a man merits and studies Torah and wisdom, he is considered in front of Me as if he stood up entirely all of the world; it hewed out pillars seven these are seven lands - if a man merits and sustains it, he inherits seven lands, and if not, he is divided among seven lands. She prepared her meat, she mingled her wine (Proverbs 9:2): Rabbi Abahu said, "This is Esther the Queen, as at the time that trouble came to Israel in the days of Mordekhai, what did she do? She set up a meal for Achashverosh and Haman the evildoer and she got him very drunk with wine, and the evildoer thought to himself that she was granting him honor and he did not know that she opened a trap for him - from that which she got him drunk with wine, she acquired her people forever; she even prepared her table that she set herself up a table in this world and in the world to come. And what is that? That is the good name that she acquired in this world and in the world to come; since all of the holidays are to be nullified in the future but the days of Purim will not be nullified, as it is stated (Esther 9:28), 'And these days of Purim will not be rescinded from the Jews.'" Rabbi Elazar said, "Also Yom Kippur will forever not be nullified, as it is stated, 'And it will be to you for an everlasting statute to atone for the Children of Israel from all of their sins once a year.'" Another [understanding]: she even prepared her table: This is the Torah, that sets up a table for one who is involved with it, in this world and in the next world, as it is stated (Ezekiel 41:22), "and He spoke to me, 'This is the table that is in front of the Lord.'" Another [understanding]: she even prepared her table: It once happened that Rabbi Akiva was imprisoned in jail and Rabbi Yehoshua the Garsi, his student, was serving him. [On] the eve of the holiday, [the latter] departed from him and went to his house. Eliyahu came and stood at the entrance of his house. He said to him, "Peace be unto you, my teacher." He said [back] to him, "Peace be unto you, my teacher and master." He said to him, "Is there nothing that you require? He said to him, "I am a priest and I have come to tell you that Rabbi Akiva has died in jail." Immediately they both went to the jail and found the opening of the gate of the jail open and the minister of the jail was sleeping and all of the people that were in the jail were [also] sleeping; and they lay Rabbi Akiva on the bed and went out [with him]. Immediately Eliyahu, may he be remembered for the good, attended to him and took him on his shoulders. And when Rabbi Yehoshua the Garsi saw this, he said to Eliyahu, "My teacher, did you not say to me, I am Eliyahu [the] priest, and a priest is forbidden to become impure through [contact with a dead [body]!" He said [back] to him, "It is enough for you, Rabbi Yehoshua, my son, God forbid - as there is no impurity from the righteous, and also not from their students." And they carried him the whole night until they reached the mansion house of Caesarea. And when they reached there, they went up three steps and went down inclines and a cave opened in front of them and there they saw a chair and a bench and a candelabra. And they laid down Rabbi Akiva on the bed and left. And when they went out, the cave sealed and the lamp on the candelabra became lit. And when Eliyahu saw this, he opened and said, "Happy are the righteous and happy are those that toil in the Torah and happy are those that fear God - as covered and hidden and reserved for you is a place in the Garden of Eden in the future to come. Happy are you Rabbi Akiva, that you should find a resting place prepared for you at the time of your death. That is why it is stated, 'she even prepared her table.'" And it also once happened with Rabban Gamliel, that the elders were reclining [to eat] with him and Tabi, his servant, was standing to serve him. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariya said, "Woe is to you Canaan that you obligated your children [to servitude], whether they be righteous or whether they be evil." Rabbi Yishmael said, "We have found greater than this - Avraham was the great one of the world who served the Canaanites." Rabbi Tarfon said, "We have found greater than this - the High priest serves Israel on Yom Kippur." Rabban Gamliel said to them, "You have left over the honor of the Holy One, blessed be He, and you are dealing with the honor of flesh and blood? The Holy One, blessed be He, created His world, makes the wind blow, makes the sun shine, brings down the rain, makes the due appear, makes the plants grow and sets up a table in front of each and every [person], as it is written, (Psalms 23:5), 'Set a table in front of me.' And why [does He do] so much? In the merit of Torah. Therefore Shlomo prophesied and said, 'she even prepared her table.'" Rabbi Nechemiah said, "Come and see how great is the honor of Torah: It is not enough for them, for the sages, that He prepares a table for them, but it [even] adds wisdom to their wisdom. This is what is written (Proverbs 9:9), 'Give to a wise man, and he will become even wiser; inform a righteous one, and he will increase in teaching' - If you see a Torah scholar for whom words of Torah are beloved, give him wisdom and he will become even wiser; 'inform a righteous one, and he will increase in teaching' - that since he destroys his soul to hear words of Torah, it also adds fear [of God] to him."

“Enjoy life with a woman whom you love all the days of your life of vanity which He has given you under the sun, all the days of your vanity, as that is your portion in life, and in your toil that you toil under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 9:9).
“Enjoy life with a woman whom you love.” Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] said in the name of the holy congregation: Acquire for yourself a craft with Torah. What is the reason? “Enjoy life [with a woman]…”²⁷The midrash is interpreting the world “life” to refer to Torah, and the term “woman” to refer to a craft. One should have a craft with which to earn a livelihood, in addition to studying Torah. Why does he call them the holy congregation? It is because Rabbi Yosei ben Meshulam and Rabbi Shimon ben Menaseya, who would divide the day into three, one-third for Torah, one-third for prayer, and one-third for labor, were there. Some say: They would engage in Torah study during the days of winter, and in labor during the days of summer. Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Elazar would call Rabbi Yehoshua son of Rabbi Timi and Rabbi Burki the holy congregation, because they would divide the day into three, one-third for Torah, one-third for prayer, and one-third for labor.
It is taught: It is prohibited for a mourner to marry a woman until thirty days [pass]. Rabbi Yehuda says: Until three consecutive pilgrimage festivals pass, corresponding to the three times that it is written: Life, life, life. In what case is this said? In a case when he has sons; however, if he has no sons, or if he has minor sons, it is permitted due to diminution of procreation and to see to their needs.²⁸The mourner can marry a woman even within thirty days in order to fulfill the mitzva of procreation, or so that his new wife can take care of his young children. There was an incident and the wife of Rabbi Tarfon died, and when the grave was covered, he said to her sister amidst the mourning: ‘Enter my house²⁹Marry me. and raise your sister’s children.’ Even though he married her, he did not engage in conjugal relations until after thirty days. It is taught: It is prohibited for a mourner to go to a house of feasting until thirty days [have passed].
It was taught: The mitzvot incumbent upon a father regarding his son are to circumcise him and to redeem him, and also to teach him Torah, to teach him a trade, and to marry him to a woman. Some say: Also to teach him to swim in a river. To circumcise him, from where [is it derived]? As it is stated: “He that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every male” (Genesis 17:12). To redeem him, from where [is it derived]? As it is stated: “And all the first-born of man among your sons you shall redeem” (Exodus 13:13). To teach him Torah, from where [is it derived]? As it is stated: “You shall teach them” (Deuteronomy 11:19). To marry a woman, from where [is it derived]? As it is stated: “Take women and beget sons and daughters and take women for your sons” (Jeremiah 29:6). To teach him to swim in a river, from where [is it derived]? As it is stated: “You shall choose life” (Deuteronomy 30:19).
Anyone who does not have a wife is without goodness, without a helper, without joy, without blessing, without atonement. Without good, from where [is it derived]? [From the verse:] “It is not good for man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18). Without help, from where [is it derived]? [From the verse:] “I will make him a helper alongside him” (Genesis 2:18). Without joy, from where [is it derived]? [From the verse:] “You shall rejoice, you and your household” (Deuteronomy 14:26). Without blessing, from where [is it derived]? [From the verse:] “To place a blessing upon your house” (Ezekiel 44:30). Without atonement, from where [is it derived]? [From the verse:] “And he shall atone for himself and for his household” (Leviticus 16:11). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Without life as well, as it is stated: “Enjoy life with a woman whom you love.” Without peace, as it is stated: “You are peace and your house is peace” (I Samuel 25:6). Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda said: He is not even a complete person, as it is stated: “He blessed them and He called their name Adam”³⁰The word adam, which is the name of the first man, simply means “person.” (Genesis 5:2) – when the two of them are not as one they are not called Adam. Some say it diminishes the Divine Image, as it is stated: “Because He created man in the image of God” (Genesis 9:6).

9) (Vayikra 16:11) ("And Aaron shall present the bullock of the sin-offering which is his, and he shall make atonement for himself and for his household, and he shall slaughter the bullock of the sin-offering which is his.") "And Aaron shall present the bullock … and for his household": This, as has been stated, is verbal confession. How did he (the high-priest) confess? "Ana Hashem, I have sinned, I have transgressed, and I have offended before You — I and my house and the sons of Aaron Your holy nation, for on this day, etc." And they answer after him: "Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever."

9) How was this effected? He would separate three varieties on the eve of Yom Kippur in order to fill his palms and then he would return them to the mortar to satisfy "extra fine."

9) "and he shall make atonement upon it (the altar)": atonement which is (made) upon its body. (i.e., atonement through the blood, which is placed upon the corners of the altar [and not verbal atonement])."and he shall take of the blood of the bullock and of the blood of the he-goat": intermixed. I might think of each by itself; it is, therefore, written (Shemoth 30:10) "of the blood of the sin-offering of the atonement once a year." How, then, am I to understand "and he shall take of the blood of the bullock and of the blood of the he-goat"? As "intermixed." (For otherwise, it would be twice a year.)

9) but on the other days of the year, when they are not commanded to come, they are not commanded not to come empty-handed — here, too, (we would say that) on a day that he is commanded, he is commanded, (but not when he is not commanded). It is, therefore, written "at all times," to include the other days of the year.

9) (Vayikra 16:22) "And the he-goat shall bear upon itself (all of their transgressions"): It bears them upon itself, "unassisted" by the other he-goats (the inner and outer he-goats). And for what do the other he-goats atone? For tumah of the sanctuary and its sanctified objects. And for what variety of this tumah do the other he-goats atone? For deliberate transgression, thereof, this being atoned for by the inner he-goat.

9) (Vayikra 16:25) "And the fat of the sin-offering he shall cause to smoke upon the altar": even on the Sabbath; even if he is in a state of uncleanliness.

9) This tells me only of work in whose general category there is kareth liability. Whence do I derive the same for work in whose general category there is no kareth liability? — that he should not climb a tree, that he should not ride on a beast, that he should not swim, that he should not clap, that he should not dance? From "shabbaton shvuth" ("a resting of restings," viz. Devarim 16:31). This tells me only of mundane restings. Whence do I derive the same for restings of mitzvah? — that he not dedicate (an offering), that he not evaluate, that he not set apart, that he not take terumah, that he not take ma'aser, that he not betroth, that he not divorce, that he not refuse (a betrothal), that he not perform chalitzah (release from levirate marriage), that he not perform yibum (levirate marriage), that he not redeem fruits of the fourth year and second tithe? From "shabbaton shvuth." "citizen": This is the citizen per se; "the citizen": to include the citizen's wife; "stranger": This is the stranger per se; "that sojourns": to include the stranger's wife; "in your midst": to include bondsmen.

9) (Vayikra 16:34) ("And this shall be to you for an everlasting statute to atone for the children of Israel from all of their sins once in the year. And he did as the L–rd commanded Moses.") "And this shall be to you, etc.": What is the intent of this? Because we find that this (the day of Yom Kippur) atones for him (even) without its he-goats, I might think that the other days (Rosh Chodesh and the festivals also) atone for him without their he-goats; it is, therefore, written "once in the year." I would then exclude Pesach and Succoth, which are seven days; but I would not exclude Shavuoth, which is one day. I would exclude Shavuoth, which is a festival along with the others, (Pesach and Succoth, which are excluded), but I would not exclude Rosh Hashanah, which is a holiday (in itself) as is Yom Kippur. It is, therefore, written "This (Yom Kippur) … once in the year." This atones for you without its he-goats, but not the other days.

9) Because it is written of the tzitz (the frontlet) (Shemoth 28:38) "And it shall be on his forehead always for acceptance for them before the L–rd," I might think that he could enter with it (even) into the holy of holies; it is, therefore, written "linen" — and not with the tzitz.

R. Abba bar Abbina said: For what reason is the parashah on < the death of > Miriam (Numb. 20:1) near the parashah on the ashes of the < red > heifer (Numb. 19:1ff.)?⁵⁶Tanh., Lev. 6:7; PRK 26(27):11; Lev. R. 20:12; yYoma 1:1 (38b); MQ 28a. Simply to teach that just as the ashes of the < red > heifer atones, so does the death of the righteous atone. R. [Judan] said: For what reason is the death of Aaron (Deut. 10:6) near the breaking of the tablets (Deut. 9:17)? To teach that the death of the righteous is as grievous to the Holy One as the breaking of the tablets. R. Hiyya bar Abba said: The sons of Aaron died on the first of Nisan.⁵⁷According to Lev. 10:1, they died at the time of the dedication of the Tabernacle; and according to Exod. 40:17, the dedication began with its erection on the first day of the first month, i.e., on the first of Abib, which came to be called Nisan. Why does it mention their death on the Day of Atonement (in Lev. 16:1)? {He said to him:} [It is simply] to teach that, just as the Day of Atonement atones, so does the death of the righteous atone. And where is it shown that the Day of Atonement atones? Where it is stated (in Lev. 16:30): FOR ON THIS DAY ATONEMENT SHALL BE MADE FOR YOU TO CLEANSE YOU. And where it is shown that the death of the righteous atones? Where it is stated (in II Sam. 21:14): THEN THEY BURIED THE BONES OF SAUL…. AND GOD RESPONDED TO THE PLEA OF THE LAND THEREAFTER.

R. Abba bar Abbina said: For what reason is the parashah on < the death of > Miriam (Numb. 20:1) near the parashah on the ashes of the < red > heifer (Numb. 19:1ff.)?⁵⁶Tanh., Lev. 6:7; PRK 26(27):11; Lev. R. 20:12; yYoma 1:1 (38b); MQ 28a. Simply to teach that just as the ashes of the < red > heifer atones, so does the death of the righteous atone. R. [Judan] said: For what reason is the death of Aaron (Deut. 10:6) near the breaking of the tablets (Deut. 9:17)? To teach that the death of the righteous is as grievous to the Holy One as the breaking of the tablets. R. Hiyya bar Abba said: The sons of Aaron died on the first of Nisan.⁵⁷According to Lev. 10:1, they died at the time of the dedication of the Tabernacle; and according to Exod. 40:17, the dedication began with its erection on the first day of the first month, i.e., on the first of Abib, which came to be called Nisan. Why does it mention their death on the Day of Atonement (in Lev. 16:1)? {He said to him:} [It is simply] to teach that, just as the Day of Atonement atones, so does the death of the righteous atone. And where is it shown that the Day of Atonement atones? Where it is stated (in Lev. 16:30): FOR ON THIS DAY ATONEMENT SHALL BE MADE FOR YOU TO CLEANSE YOU. And where it is shown that the death of the righteous atones? Where it is stated (in II Sam. 21:14): THEN THEY BURIED THE BONES OF SAUL…. AND GOD RESPONDED TO THE PLEA OF THE LAND THEREAFTER.

When Isaac sent Esau to hunt for venison that he might eat, the Holy Spirit revealed it to Rebecca, as it is said: And Rebecca heard when Isaac spoke to Esau, his son (ibid., v. 5). And she said to Jacob: Now, therefore, my son, hearken to my voice according to that which I command thee; go now to the flock and fetch me from thence two good goats (ibid., vv. 8–9). R. Berechiah said in the name of R. Helbo: She told him that they (the goats) would be good for you and good for your descendants, for they will obtain forgiveness through them on the Day of Atonement.¹⁰The scapegoats offered on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:7–26). Then he brought his father the food and wine, which he ate and drank. After that he blessed him, as is said: Therefore, God give thee of the dew of heaven…. Let peoples serve thee (ibid., v. 29). And Jacob was yet scarce gone out from the presence of Isaac, his father, that Esau, his brother, came in from his hunting (ibid., v. 30). He began to say: Let my father arise, and eat of his son’s venison (ibid., v. 31). Whereupon Isaac asked: Who art thou? (ibid., v. 32). I am thy son, he replied, thy firstborn, Esau (ibid.). Thereupon Isaac trembled very exceedingly.

10) (Vayikra 16:12-13) "and he shall bring them within the curtain and he shall put the incense upon the fire before the L–rd, and the cloud of incense shall cover the ark cover which is upon the Testimony and he shall not die"): "and he shall bring them within the curtain, and he shall put the incense on the fire before the L–rd.": that he not prepare it first on the outside and then enter — as opposed to the view of the Sadducees, who said that it should be prepared on the outside and then brought in, (saying) if it is done so before flesh and blood, how much more so before the Holy One Blessed be He! And it is written (Vayikra 16:2): "for in a cloud I shall appear upon the ark cover" — to which the sages responded: But is it not already written "And he shall put the incense on the fire before the L–rd," (i.e.,) he does so only in the holy of holies (and not outside it). What, then, is the intent of "for in a cloud I shall appear upon the ark cover"? That he would put therein a "smoke-raiser." And whence is it derived that he did so? From "and the cloud of incense shall cover the ark cover which is upon the Testimony, and he shall not die" — whence it is seen that if he did not put therein a "smoke-raiser," or if he left out one of its spices, he was liable to death.

10) R. Yishmael says: "roundabout" is written here, and "roundabout" is written elsewhere (in respect to the investiture sin-offering [chatath hamiluim]). Just as "roundabout" there entails a pause for (each of) four applications (of blood), so, "roundabout" here entails a pause for (each of) four applications (on two corners) [one on each side of the corner]).

10) "and he shall place it on the corners of the altar": He begins from the northeast corner (and then proceeds) northwest, southwest, southeast. Where he begins, (sprinkling the blood of) the sin-offering upon the outer altar, there he concludes (the sprinkling of the mixed bloods) upon the inner altar. R. Yehudah says in the name of R. Elazar: He stands on his place and he sprinkles. And on all (of the corners) he applies (the blood) from bottom to top, except in the one before which he is standing, where he applies it from top to bottom.

10) "within the curtain": This is the holy of holies; "to the holy place": This is the sanctuary. I might think that for all, the punishment is death. It is, therefore, written "before the ark cover which is on the ark, that he not die." How is this to be understood? "before the ark cover" is punishable by death; (if he enters) the other parts of the sanctuary, (he is in transgression of) an exhortation.

10) (Vayikra 16:12-13) "and he shall bring them within the curtain and he shall put the incense upon the fire before the L–rd, and the cloud of incense shall cover the ark cover which is upon the Testimony and he shall not die"): "and he shall bring them within the curtain, and he shall put the incense on the fire before the L–rd.": that he not prepare it first on the outside and then enter — as opposed to the view of the Sadducees, who said that it should be prepared on the outside and then brought in, (saying) if it is done so before flesh and blood, how much more so before the Holy One Blessed be He! And it is written (Vayikra 16:2): "for in a cloud I shall appear upon the ark cover" — to which the sages responded: But is it not already written "And he shall put the incense on the fire before the L–rd," (i.e.,) he does so only in the holy of holies (and not outside it). What, then, is the intent of "for in a cloud I shall appear upon the ark cover"? That he would put therein a "smoke-raiser." And whence is it derived that he did so? From "and the cloud of incense shall cover the ark cover which is upon the Testimony, and he shall not die" — whence it is seen that if he did not put therein a "smoke-raiser," or if he left out one of its spices, he was liable to death.

10) Whence is it derived that this entire section is stated in the order (in which it is to be performed)? From "And he did as the L–rd commanded Moses." Whence is it derived that Aaron did not wear the garments for his aggrandizement, but only to fulfill the decree of the King? From "And he did as the L–rd commanded Moses." Whence is it derived that even though Aaron heard it from Moses, it is as if he heard it from the Holy One (Himself)? From "And he did as the L–rd commanded Moses." And thus is he extolled in the Tradition (Malachi 2:5-6) "My covenant was with him … the Torah of truth was in his mouth and wrong was not found on his lips. In peace and justness he walked with Me, and many did he turn from transgression."

10) "holy, shall he wear": They must come from Temple funds. This tells me only of these alone. Whence do I derive for inclusion the other high-priestly vestments and those of his brother Cohanim? From "they are holy garments," this being an archetype for (the purchase of) all (priestly) garments from Temple funds.

(Lev. 16:1:) NOW THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES AFTER THE DEATH < OF AARON'S TWO SONS >. This text is related (to Job 37:1): AT THIS ALSO MY HEART TREMBLES. [Who spoke this verse? Elihu spoke it.] Elihu was observing how the sons of Aaron went in to sacrifice and came out destroyed by fire.⁵⁸Tanh., Lev. 6:8; cf. PRK 26(27):5; Lev. R. 20:5. He was amazed and said (ibid.): AT THIS ALSO MY HEART TREMBLES AND LEAPS FROM ITS PLACE. What did he see for him to say this? It is simply at a time when⁵⁹Besha‘ah besha‘ah shennitpaqpeqah, which translates literally as, “In the hour, in the hour that < the priesthood > was shaken.” This repetition may well be an error, which Buber seems to avoid when he cites the passage in his notes. the priesthood was shaken {i.e., when < the priesthood > had become weak} in the hand of Aaron. What is written there (in Numb. 17:21 [6])? THEN MOSES SPOKE UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL; AND THEIR PRINCES GAVE HIM A STAFF, A STAFF FOR EACH PRINCE…. So he wrote the name of each and every tribe on its staff. He also wrote the name of Aaron on the staff of Levi and put it in the middle. Moses said < It was > lest the children of Israel say: It smelled the Divine Presence and bore fruit. [Moses said: See, I am putting it in the middle so as not to give a pretext, as stated (in Numb. 17:21 [6], cont.): AND THE STAFF OF AARON WAS IN THE MIDST OF THEIR STAFFS.] What is written there (in vs. 22–23 [7–8])? THEN MOSES PLACED THE STAFFS < BEFORE THE LORD IN THE TENT OF THE TESTIMONY >…. AND THERE THE STAFF OF AARON < OF THE HOUSE OF LEVI > HAD SPROUTED; IT < HAD PUT FORTH SPROUTS, PRODUCED BLOSSOMS, > AND HAD BORNE ALMONDS. The scriptural text lacked nothing. Why then: AND HAD BORN (rt.: GML) ALMONDS (rt.: ShQD)?⁶⁰Numb. R. 18:23. It repaid (rt.: GML) anyone who was bent on (rt.: ShQD) evil against the tribe of Levi. So while (in Numb. 17:16–24 [1–9]) even dry pieces of wood emitted an aroma among those who live in the world, [sprouted blossoms,] came out alive, and produced fruits; the sons of Aaron, who entered there alive, came out destroyed by fire. So when Elihu beheld the one and the other, he said (in Job 37:1): AT THIS ALSO MY HEART TREMBLES. When? (Lev. 16:1:) NOW THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.

“I went down to the nut garden to look at the budding of the valley, to see if the vine had blossomed and the pomegranates were in bloom” (Song of Songs 6:11).
“I went down to the nut garden,” Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Israel was likened to a nut tree. Just as a nut tree is pruned, and it regenerates, [such that] it is pruned for its own good – why? – because it regenerates, like that which is trimmed and regenerates, and like fingernails that are trimmed and regenerate, so too, whatever Israel pares from the wages of their labor and gives to those who toil in Torah study in this world, it is pared and regenerated for them, to their benefit. It provides them with wealth in this world and a fine reward in the World to Come.
Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Just as these trees, if you cover their roots at the time of their planting, they are successful, and if not, they are not successful, but this nut tree, if you cover its roots at the time of its planting, it is not successful, so too Israel, “one who conceals his transgressions will not succeed” (Proverbs 28:13).
Rabbi Elasha said: The verse should have stated only: “To the vegetable garden,” but it said: “To the nut garden.” Thus, it teaches that He gave them the strength of trees and the radiance of vegetables. Rabbi Azarya said two: Just as the shell of a nut protects its fruit, so the ignoramuses of Israel support the Torah.³⁶They do so by supporting those who engage in Torah study. That is what is written: “It is a tree of life for those who grasp it” (Proverbs 3:18).
He said another: Just as this nut, if it falls into filth, you take it, scour it and rinse it, and it is restored to its original state and it is fit for consumption, so too, regardless of how much Israel is sullied with iniquities all the days of the year, Yom Kippur comes and atones for them. That is what is written: “For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to purify you” (Leviticus 16:30). Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon says: Just as this nut has two shells, so, Israel has two commandments, circumcision and uncovering.³⁷These are the two stages of circumcision, which are likened to the removal of the hard and the soft shells of a nut.
Another matter, “to the nut garden,” Reish Lakish said: Just as this nut tree is smooth, as we learned (Pe’a 4:1): Rabbi Shimon says: Regarding the smooth nut trees as well.³⁸As opposed to other trees, where one may leave the pe’a fruit on the tree for the poor, one may not do so on a nut tree, because it is smooth and dangerous to climb it. Therefore, one must remove all the nuts from the tree. Anyone who climbs to the top of it, and does not pay attention to how he should climb, will fall and die. He will receive his due from the nut tree. So too, anyone who asserts authority over the public in Israel and does not pay attention as to how he should lead Israel, ultimately, he will fall and receive his due from them. That is what is written: “Israel is sacred to the Lord, the first of His crop, all those who devour it will be guilty…” (Jeremiah 2:3).
Another matter, “I went down to the nut garden,” just as the nut is a toy for children and amusement for kings, so are Israel in this world, due to iniquity, as it is written: “I have become a laughingstock to all my people…” (Lamentations 3:14). But in the future, “Kings will be your caregivers” (Isaiah 49:23).
Another matter, “I went down to the nut garden,” just as on this nut tree there are nuts with brittle shells, medium shells, and hard shells, so too with Israel, some of them give charity at their own initiative, some give if you demand it from them, and some do not give even if you demand it from them. Rabbi Levi said: The parable says, a gate that does not open for a mitzva will open for a doctor.
Another matter, “I went down to the nut garden,” just as a stone breaks a nut, so too, the Torah is called a stone and the evil inclination is called a stone. The Torah is called a stone, as it is stated: “I will give you the stone tablets” (Exodus 24:12), and the evil inclination is called a stone, as it is stated: “I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh (Ezekiel 36:26). Rabbi Levi said: [This is analogous] to a desolate place which was afflicted by gangs. What did the king do? He positioned members of the royal guard there to defend it, so [the bandits] would not accost passersby. So too, the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘The Torah is called stone and the evil inclination is called stone, let the stone protect from the stone.’
Another matter, “I went down to the nut garden,” just as the nut cannot be smuggled past the tax collector because its [rattling] can be heard and it is conspicuous, so too Israel, any place that one of them goes, he cannot say that he is not a Jew. Why? Because he is conspicuous. That is what is written: “Everyone who sees them will recognize them, for they are the descendants of the blessed of the Lord” (Isaiah 61:9).
Another matter, “I went down to the nut garden,” just as the nut, if you have a sack filled with nuts, you can [still] put numerous sesame seeds and mustard seeds into it and it will hold them, so too, numerous proselytes have come and joined Israel. That is what is written: “Who has counted the dust of Jacob” (Numbers 23:10).
Another matter, “I went down to the nut garden,” just as the nut, if you take one from the pile, all of them collapse and roll onto one another, the same is true of Israel; if one of them is stricken all of them feel it. That is what is written: “Shall one man sin, and You will rage against the entire congregation?” (Numbers 16:22).
Rabbi Berekhya said: Just as the nut has four compartments and a space in the middle, so were Israel were situated in the wilderness; four banners, four camps, and the Tent of Meeting in the middle. That is what is written: “The Tent of Meeting…shall journey” (Numbers 2:17).
Another matter, “I went down to the nut garden,” this is the world. “To look at the budding of the valley, this is Israel. “To see if the vine had blossomed,” these are the synagogues and the study halls. “And the pomegranates were in bloom,” these are the children who sit and engage in Torah study, and sit in rows like pomegranate seeds.

When did he tell Moses to make the Sanctuary? It was on the Day of Atonement, the tenth day of Tishri. It happened then because he ascended the mountain three times and spent one hundred and twenty days there; that is, from the sixth day of Sivan to the Day of Atonement, the tenth day of Tishri. That is the day of which it is said: And the Lord repented of the evil which he said He would do unto His people (Exod. 32:14) because of the episode of the golden calf. It was the day He said to him: I have pardoned according to thy words (Num. 14:20); it was the day He said: Let them make Me a Sanctuary; it was the day he asked: And pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for Thine inheritance (Exod. 34:5); on this day may You grant pardon to future generations; it was the day the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: For on this day shall atonement be made for you (Lev. 16:30). Hence they constructed the Tabernacle with joy and gladness.

11) (Vayikra 16:14) ("And he shall take the blood of the bullock, and he shall sprinkle with his finger on the face of the kaporeth (the ark cover) to the east; and before the kaporeth shall he sprinkle seven times of the blood with his finger.") "And he shall take the blood of the bullock": He takes it from the one who was stirring it. "and he shall sprinkle": and not let it drip (from his finger). "and he shall sprinkle": and not fling. "his finger": "his finger" is written here and elsewhere (Vayikra 14:16) in respect to a leper). Just as "his finger" there is the most dexterous, i.e., the index finger of the right hand, so, "his finger" here.

11) "roundabout": R. Yishmael says: "roundabout" is written here, and "roundabout" is written elsewhere (viz. Shemoth 1:5). Just as here there are four distinct applications (one on each corner), so, there, there are four distinct applications.

11) "before the ark cover (kaporeth) which is on the ark": What is the intent of this? Because it is written "kaporeth," I might think that (in addition to the kaporeth) there is a covering for the ark. It is, therefore, written "which is on the ark." The kaporeth is on the ark and there is no (other) cover on the ark.

11) Whence is it derived that he requires immersion? From "And he shall bathe his flesh in water, and he shall put them on."

Rabbi Yitzḥak began: “Because you did not serve the Lord your God with joy and with gladness of heart, due to abundance of everything, you will serve your enemies…” (Deuteronomy 28:47–48) – had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “You will bring them and plant them in the mountain of Your inheritance” (Exodus 15:17), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “Let all their evil come before You [and do to them as You did to me]” (Lamentations 1:22).³³The term “You will bring them” in the verse in Exodus and the word “come” in the verse in Lamentations have the same root: tav, bet, alef.
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “Peoples heard, they were agitated” (Exodus 15:14), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “They heard that I am sighing” (Lamentations 1:21).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “I have seen the affliction of My people that is in Egypt” (Exodus 3:7), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “See, Lord, for I am in distress, my innards burn” (Lamentations 1:20).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “You shall proclaim on this very day” (Leviticus 23:21), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “I called my lovers; [they deceived me]” (Lamentations 1:19).³⁴The word “proclaim” in Leviticus and the word “called” in Lamentations have the same root: kuf, resh, alef.
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “Justice [tzedek], justice you shall pursue” (Deuteronomy 16:20), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “The Lord is righteous [tzadik], for I have defied His word” (Lamentations 1:18).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “You shall open your hand [to your brother]” (Deuteronomy 15:11), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “Zion spread its hands, [there is no comforter for it]” (Lamentations 1:17).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “These are the appointed times of the Lord” (Leviticus 23:4), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “For these I weep” (Lamentations 1:16).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “We will ascend on the highway [bamsila]” (Numbers 20:19), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “The Lord trampled [sila] all my mighty” (Lamentations 1:15).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “I broke the bars of your yoke” (Leviticus 26:13), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “The yoke of my transgressions is preserved in His hand” (Lamentations 1:14).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “A perpetual fire shall burn upon the altar” (Leviticus 6:6), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “From on high He sent fire into my bones” (Lamentations 1:13).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “[The Lord your God who goes before you, He shall fight for you according to all that He did for you.…] in the entire path [derekh] that you went” (Deuteronomy 1:30–31), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “May it not befall you, all passersby [ovrei derekh]” (Lamentations 1:12).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “You will eat your bread to satiation” (Leviticus 26:5), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “All its people are sighing, seeking bread” (Lamentations 1:11).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “No man will covet your land” (Exodus 34:24), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “The besieger spread his hand over all its delights” (Lamentations 1:10).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “For on this day he shall atone for you [to purify you]” (Leviticus 16:30), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “Its impurity is on its skirts” (Lamentations 1:9).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “From all your sins you shall be purified before the Lord” (Leviticus 16:30), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “Jerusalem has sinned” (Lamentations 1:8).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “You shall be remembered before the Lord your God” (Numbers 10:9), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “Jerusalem remembered in the days of its affliction” (Lamentations 1:7).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “I will walk in your midst” (Leviticus 26:12), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “All the glory of the daughter of Zion has gone” (Lamentations 1:6).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “The Lord will place you as a head [lerosh]” (Deuteronomy 28:13), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “Its foes are ascendant [lerosh], its enemies are tranquil” (Lamentations 1:5).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “Three times a year [shall all your males appear before the Lord your God…on the festival]” (Deuteronomy 16:16), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “The ways of Zion mourn [without festival pilgrims]” (Lamentations 1:4).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “You will dwell securely” (Leviticus 26:5), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “Judah has been exiled in affliction” (Lamentations 1:3).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “It is a night of watching of the Lord” (Exodus 12:42), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “It weeps at night” (Lamentations 1:2).
Had you been worthy, you would have read in the Torah: “How [eikha] can I bear alone” (Deuteronomy 1:12), but now that you are not worthy, you read: “How [eikha] does…sit solitary?” (Lamentations 1:1).

[(Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.] < All > four of [Aaron's sons] deserved to die; but Moses prayed for them, and his prayer produced half < an answer >. When? When Israel made the calf, what is written there (in Deut. 9:20)? AND THE LORD WAS ANGRY ENOUGH WITH AARON TO DESTROY (rt.: ShMD) HIM. Destruction (rt.: ShMD) can only be annihilation. Thus it is stated (in Amos 2:9): I DESTROYED (rt.: ShMD) THEIR (the Amorites') FRUIT ABOVE. When Moses prayed, his prayer produced half < an answer >.

The bull was due to the merit of Abraham of whom it is stated (in Gen. 18:7), “Then Abraham ran unto the herd [...] (for a calf to feed his heavenly visitors).”⁵⁹Lev. R. 17:9; PRK 9:9. The sheep was due to the merit of Isaac, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 22:13), “And Abraham lifted his eyes and he saw, and behold there was a ram [...] (to replace an obedient Isaac as a sacrifice).” The goat was due to the merit of Jacob, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 27:9), “Please go unto the flock, and bring me two good kids of the goats from there.” What is the meaning of “good” (in reference to the two kids)? R. Berekhyah said in the name of R. Helbo, “[They are] good for you and good for your children.⁶⁰Gen. R. 65:14; PR 47:4. [They are] good for you, because through them you are to receive the blessings;⁶¹When Jacob brought the meat from the goats to his father, he received a blessing. and they are good for your children, because through them atonement is granted to your children on the Day of Atonement.” (Lev. 22:27, cont.:) “It shall remain seven days with its mother.” R. Joshua of Sikhnin says in the name of R. Levi, “[The situation] is similar to a king who entered a province⁶²Lev. R. 27:10; PRK 9:10. where he issued a proclamation and said, ‘Let no strangers⁶³Gk.: xenoi. who are here see my face before they first see the face of [my] matron.’⁶⁴Lat.: matrona. Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, ‘My children shall not approach me with an offering until the Sabbath [queen] has passed over it. For there are no seven [days] without a Sabbath, and there is no circumcision without [the passing of] a Sabbath.’” R. Isaac said, “An ordinance for humanity and an ordinance for beasts [are on a par].⁶⁵Above, 8:9. An ordinance for humanity is (Lev. 12:3), ‘And on the eighth day [the flesh of his foreskin] shall be circumcised.’ And an ordinance for beasts is (Lev. 22:27), ‘and from the eighth day on, it shall be acceptable [for an offering by fire to the Lord].’”

[(Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.] The Holy One said to him: Aaron, did I not write this in my Torah (in Exod. 22:8 [9]): IN EVERY CASE OF MISAPPROPRIATION, WHETHER FOR A BULL…. Do you not remember what you did with the bull, as stated (in Ps. 106:20): THUS THEY EXCHANGED THEIR GLORY FOR THE IMAGE OF A BULL?⁶¹See Numb. R. 9:47. For alternate interpretations of Exod. 22:8 [9] that use the same form, see BQ 54b. (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) FOR AN ASS. This refers to the Egyptians, about whom it is written (in Ezek. 23:20): WHOSE FLESH IS LIKE THE FLESH OF ASSES. You (Egyptians)⁶²The parallel account in Numb. R. 11:47 explains that it was the Egyptians who enticed Israel to make the golden calf. made for them a calf, whom they worshiped, [as stated] (in Numb. 11:4): THEN THE RABBLE⁶³I.e., the Egyptians who joined Israel in the Exodus. WHICH WAS IN THEIR MIDST. (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) FOR A SHEEP (seh). This refers to Israel, as stated (in Jer. 50:17): ISRAEL IS A SCATTERED FLOCK (seh). (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) FOR A GARMENT. < i.e. > that one about which it is written (in Is. 3:6): YOU HAVE A GARMENT; YOU SHALL BE OUR LEADER.⁶⁴According to Numb. R. 9:47, the allusion is to Israel having made the golden calf their king. (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) < OR > ANY LOSS, since it is written of them (i.e., of Israel in Jer. 50:6): MY PEOPLE WERE LOST SHEEP. (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) OF WHICH ONE SAYS: THIS IS IT. < This refers to > them when they said (in Exod. 32:8): {THIS IS YOUR GOD} [THESE ARE YOUR GODS], O ISRAEL. (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) THE CASE OF BOTH PARTIES SHALL COME BEFORE GOD. This refers to Moses of whom it is written (in Exod. 7:1): SEE, I HAVE SET YOU AS A GOD TO PHARAOH, < in that > Moses sat in judgment over them. (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) THE ONE WHOM GOD CONDEMNS. This refers to the judges, of whom it is written (in Exod. 22:27 [28]): YOU SHALL NOT CURSE A GOD < NOR A RULER OF YOUR PEOPLE.⁶⁵See above, Exod. 2:1, and the note there. (Exod. 22:8 [9], cont.:) SHALL PAY HIS NEIGHBOR DOUBLE. This refers to the two sons of Aaron. Ergo (in Lev. 16:1): AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.

12) I might think that there is no cover on the ark, but that some other material intervenes between the kaporeth and the (tablets of the) Testimony; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 16:13) "and the cloud of incense shall cover the ark cover which is on the Testimony, and he shall not die" — nothing intervenes between the kaporeth and the Testimony.

12) "upon the face of the ark cover to the east": This is the archetype (binyan av) for "face" always connoting "east."

12) (Vayikra 16:19) ("And he shall sprinkle upon it of the blood with his finger seven times; and he shall cleanse it and hallow it from the uncleanliness of the children of Israel.") "And he shall sprinkle upon it": upon the "clean spot" of the altar (i.e., After sprinkling upon the corners, he moves the coals and the ashes on the altar aside and sprinkles on the area that has been cleared.) "of the blood": of the blood under discussion (i.e., that in the sprinkling bowl). "seven times": and not seven drops. "seven": He counts seven times, not "one and seven" (as he does in the instance of the sprinklings on the curtain).

12) I might think that there is no cover on the ark, but that some other material intervenes between the kaporeth and the (tablets of the) Testimony; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 16:13) "and the cloud of incense shall cover the ark cover which is on the Testimony, and he shall not die" — nothing intervenes between the kaporeth and the Testimony.

12) And whence is it derived that when he changes from white garments to gold garments and from gold garments to white garments he must immerse? From "holy garments, and he shall bathe his flesh in water and he shall put them on."

[From where did the sin come, for which they received [their < repayment >?]⁶⁶In addition to putting all of section 13 within square brackets, Buber has also set individual words and phrases within this section in square brackets. R. Hosha'ya said: When Moses along with the elders of Israel went up from the desert; Aaron, Hur, seventy elders, Nadab, and Abihu went up with him.⁶⁷See above, Lev. 6:7. Moses and Aaron walked first, Nadab and Abihu walked after them, and all the elders of Israel walked after them. Now Nadab and Abihu reflected in their hearts and said: When will these two elders pass away so that we may receive authority and become first in everything: The Holy One said to them (in Prov. 27:1): DO NOT BOAST OF TOMORROW. A lot of colts have died, and their skins have been made into coverings for their mother's backs. He said to them: From that time you should have gotten your < just deserts >, but what shall I do? See, I shall wait for you until the Tabernacle goes up, and after that I shall judge them. Therefore, when the Tabernacle was standing they received their sentence ⁶⁸Gk.: apophasis. and died. (Lev. 16:1:) AFTER THE DEATH OF AARON'S TWO SONS.

(Numbers 14:11:) “And the Lord said to Moses, ‘How long will this people spurn Me.’” This text is related (to Proverbs 1:25), “You subverted all my counsel.” All the good that I counseled about you, you spoiled and negated. At first (in Exod. 3:8), “I have come down to rescue them from the Egyptians”: I came down with thousands of thousands and multitudes of multitudes of angels for your sake, and I gave over to each one [of you] two angels. R. Johanan said, “One to strap on his armor and the other to place a crown upon his head.” Rav Huna said, “He clothed them with a regal tunic and the explicit name [of God] was engraved upon them.” All the days that it was in their hand, no bad thing could touch them, not an angel and not anything else. But when they sinned, Moses said to them (in Exod. 33:5), “Remove your adornment.” At that time (in Exod. 33:4), “The people heard this bad thing.” And it is written (in Exod. 33:6), “And the Children of Israel were stripped of their adornment from Mount Horev.” What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He brought the angel of death and said to him, “The whole world is in your power except for this nation that I have chosen.” The angel of death said to the Holy One, blessed be He, “I was created for nought in this world.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “I have created you so that you shall discern in every nation except for this nation, over which you do not have power.” He saw the advice that the Holy One, blessed be He, advised about them, that they should be alive and flourish, as stated (Deut. 4:4), “But you who cling to the Lord your God are all alive today.” And so too does it say (in Exod. 32:16), “The tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God that was inscribed (harut) upon the tablets.” What is the meaning of harut? R. Judah says, “Freedom (herut) from the kingdoms.” R. Nehemiah says, “Freedom (herut) from the angel of death.” And they saw the counsel that the Holy One, blessed be He, counseled about them. Immediately after forty days, they spoiled the counsel. Therefore it is stated (in Proverbs 1:25), “You subverted all my counsel.” And about this is it said, (in Numb. 14:11), “And the Lord said to Moses, ‘How long will this people spurn Me.’” Moses said (in Numb. 14:14), “They have heard that You, O Lord, are in the midst of this people….” What [would] the nations of the world say? “The gods of Canaan are stronger than the gods of Egypt: The gods of Egypt are falsehood, but those of Canaan are powerful.” (Numb. 14:14, 16), “And they will say to the inhabitants of this land…, ‘The Lord does not have the ability.’” As the nations will not say about these that He called My firstborn son, that He would destroy them; so “The Lord does not have the ability to bring them.” You say (in Numb. 4:12), “I will strike them with pestilence and disown them,” and I say (in Numb 4:19), “Please pardon.” (Numb. 14:12:) “I will strike them with pestilence and disown them.” Moses said, “Master of the world, look at the covenant with their ancestors, to whom You swore that You would raise up from them kings, prophets, and priests!”⁴⁹-Numb. R. 16:22, cont.; see below, Numb. 4a:14. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “But are you not one of their children?” (Ibid., cont.:) “Then I will make you into a nation that is greater [and more numerous than they].’” When Moses saw [how things were], he took a different course (in Numb. 14:13-14): “But Moses said unto the Lord, ‘When the Egyptians hear [what happened]…, they will say unto the inhabitants of this land.’” They will say, “He had no power to sustain them.”⁵⁰Cf. below, Numb. 4a:5. He said to him, “But have they not seen the miracles and the mighty deeds which I did for them in Egypt and by the sea? So how will they say (in Numb. 14:16), ‘The Lord does not have the ability to bring this people [into the land]?’” They will say, “He was able to stand against one king, [but] He was not able to stand against thirty one kings.⁵¹See Josh. 12:9-14. Master of the universe, act on Your behalf. (Numb. 14:17:) “So now please let the power of the Lord increase,” and let the principle of mercy overcome the principle of justice. (Ibid., cont.:) “As you have promised, saying.” I said to You, “With what principle do You judge Your world,” as stated (in Exod. 33:13) “Please make Your ways known to me.” So you removed (rt.: 'br) the principle of justice from me (according to Exod. 34:6), “And the Lord passed by (rt.: 'br) [before] him, and proclaimed, [‘The Lord, the Lord is a merciful and gracious God’].” Fulfill that principle of which You told me; (according to Numb. 14:17-19) “please let the power of the Lord increase…. The Lord [is of long patience, of great kindness…] (the Lord is a merciful and gracious God…) Please pardon the sin of this people.” The Holy One, blessed be He, accepted his words and conceded to him, as stated (Numb. 14:20), “Then the Lord said, ‘I have pardoned like your words.’” As truly in the future, the nations of the world would say like your words. (Numb. 14:21, 23:) “Nevertheless, as I live […], Surely they shall not see [the land which I promised on oath to their ancestors.” It is also written (in Numb. 32:11), “Surely none of] the people who came up from Egypt, from twenty years old and up, [shall see the land].”⁵²Numb. R. 16:23. Whether one was in agreement or was not in agreement (with the spies), he did not enter [the land]. Of the people who came up from Egypt, if one had gotten two [pubic] hairs but was less than twenty,⁵³On the concept that moral responsibility comes at twenty, see Rashi on Gen. 23:1. [only] if he was in agreement with them, he did not enter [the land]. But nonetheless, not one of them died at less than sixty.⁵⁴I.e., the Holy One subsequently had compassion on all under twenty, so that they outlived the forty wilderness years to die in the land of Israel. So Enoch Zundel in his commentary, ‘Ets Yosef, on Numb. R. 16:23(14). Come and see the difference between righteous and wicked, [even as it is stated (in Mal. 3:18), “Then you shall again see [the difference] between [righteous and wicked].” It is comparable to a certain matron⁵⁵Lat.: matrona. who had a bondmaid. Now her husband went to a country overseas. All night the bondmaid said to the matron, “I am fairer than you and the king loves me more than you.” That matron said to her, “When the morning comes, you shall know who is fairer and whom the king loves.” Similarly do the nations of the world say to Israel, “As for us, our deeds are more beautiful, and us does the Holy One, blessed be He, desire.” Therefore Isaiah has said, “When the morning comes, we shall know whom the Holy One, blessed be He, desires,” as stated (in Is. 21:12), “The watchman said, ‘The morning comes […].’” When the world to come arrives, which is called morning,⁵⁶See Targum Pss. 90:14; 101:8. we shall know, as stated (according to Mal. 3:18), “Then you shall again see [the difference] between righteous and wicked.” It is written (in Ps. 62:10), “But humans are mere vanity […].” R Hiyya⁵⁷Since the authority generally cited as R. Hiyya lived sometime before R. Levi, the R. Hiyya cited here could not be he. This Hiyya may well be R. Hiyya the father of R. Berekhiah the Priest. said in the name of R. Levi, “All vanities which Israel does all the days of the year are (ibid., cont.) to go up (i.e., vanish) on the scales (mozenayim).” The Holy One, blessed be He, pardons them in the constellation Libra (Mozenayim), in the month of Tishri. It is so stated (in Lev. 16:30), “For on this day atonement shall be made for you [to cleanse you]….”

Our masters say: < It was > because their eyes strayed away from the Divine Presence. They (i.e., Nadab and Abihu) said: Moses did not do so, when (according to Exod. 24:9–10) he went into the firmament and beheld the Divine Presence; for he had no need of either eating or drinking. With us also, when we behold the Divine Presence, we shall have no need of either eating or drinking. Even so, (according to vs. 11): THEY BEHELD GOD, but they did need to eat and drink, as stated (ibid., cont.): AND THEY ATE AND DRANK. From that time the Holy One sought to stretch out his hand against them. The Holy One said: I shall wait until the Tabernacle is made. Then when they enter to sacrifice (rt.: QRB), I shall carry out the divine judgment upon them. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 16:1, cont.): WHEN THEY DREW NEAR (rt.: QRB) BEFORE THE LORD, THEY DIED. BEFORE THE LORD is written two times (in Numb. 3:4): BUT NADAB AND ABIHU DIED BEFORE THE LORD, WHEN THEY OFFERED ALIEN FIRE [BEFORE THE LORD]. Why two times? The Holy One said: Bring out the dead from before me, for so it is written (in Lev. 10:4): DRAW NEAR AND CARRY YOUR BROTHERS AWAY FROM BEFORE THE SANCTUARY. When Israel, as it were, is in trouble, he also is with them; for so it is written (in Is. 63:9): IN ALL THEIR TROUBLE, IT TROUBLED HIM. R. Meir said (concerning Exod. 14:30): SO THE LORD SAVED (WYWSh', voweled as wayyosha') < ISRAEL > ON THAT DAY: The written text (ketiv) < reads > SO < THE LORD > WAS SAVED (WYWSh', voweled wayyiwwasha') < ON THAT DAY WITH ISRAEL >.⁷⁰Below, 6:18; below, Numb. 1:10; Tanh. Lev. 6:12; Numb. R. 2:2; cf. Exod. R. 30:24. R. Abbahu said: See what is written (in Ps. 80:3 [2]): BEFORE EPHRAIM AND MANASSEH⁷¹The Masoretic Text reads: BEFORE EPHRAIM, BENJAMIN, AND MANASSEH. STIR UP YOUR MIGHT AND COME TO SAVE US. To you and to us belongs the redemption. The Holy One said: In the world to come I will redeem you. Then you shall be happy, and I will be happy. [It is so stated] (in Ps. 104:31): MAY THE LORD BE HAPPY IN HIS WORKS. (Ps. 149:2:) LET {THE LORD} [ISRAEL] BE HAPPY IN ITS MAKER.]

13) A variant: "on the face of the ark cover to the east": He did not aim at sprinkling above or below, but made a whip-swing motion.

13) "and he shall cleanse it and hallow it from the uncleanlinesses of the children of Israel": He cleanses it from past defilements so that it is hallowed for future use.

13) "that he not die": This is the punishment. "for in a cloud I shall appear upon the ark cover": This is the exhortation. And R. Elazar said: I might think that both the punishment and the exhortation were stated before the death of the two sons of Aaron; it is, therefore, written "after the death of the two sons of Aaron." I might think that both were stated after the death of the sons of Aaron; it is, therefore, written "for in the cloud I shall appear upon the ark cover." How is this to be understood? The exhortation was stated before the death of the sons of Aaron, and the punishment was not stated until after their death.

13) I might think that if he changes from gold garments to (other) gold garments or from white garments to (other) white garments he must immerse; it is, therefore, written "holy garments are they" (i.e., all holy garments of one color are considered one and require only one washing). I might think that he requires immersion between breeches and tunic, between tunic and belt and between belt and mitre; it is, therefore, written "and he shall put them on." All as one.

Rabbi Yoḥanan interpreted the verse regarding the incense of the house of Avtinas.²⁸⁴The house of Avtinas was a priestly family that would prepare the incense to be used in the Temple. See, e.g., Mishna Shekalim 5:1. “A bundle of myrrh,” this is one of the eleven spices that one places in it. Rabbi Huna said in its regard: “The Lord said to Moses: Take spices for you [stacte and onycha and galbanum; spices and pure frankincense; each part shall be equal]” (Exodus 30:34). [Take spices for you], these are two.²⁸⁵The word spices is plural. “Stacte and onycha and galbanum,” these make five. “Spices,” if you say that these are two, “spices” was already stated. “Each part shall be equal,” give five corresponding to five, these are ten. “And pure frankincense,” these are eleven. From here, the Sages examined and found that these eleven spices alone are optimal for incense.
“Lying between my breasts,” as it was confined between the two staves of the Ark.²⁸⁶The cloud created by the burning of incense in the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur was confined to the area between the two staves of the Ark (Matnot Kehuna). “A cluster of henna [eshkol hakofer],” as it atones [mekhaper] for the iniquities of Israel. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Cluster, as it would rise in a column until the rafters and then spread and descend like a cluster. Hakofer, as it atones [mekhaper] for the iniquities of Israel.
And Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is written: “The incense cloud will cover” (Leviticus 16:13). We did not know what this covering was until David came and explained it: “You forgave the iniquity of Your people; You covered [all of their sins]” (Psalms 85:3). “In the vineyards of Ein Gedi,” due to the conditions that I stipulated to Abraham your patriarch between the pieces, as it is stated: “On that day, the Lord established a covenant with Abram, saying…” (Genesis 15:18).²⁸⁷The covenant was based on the animals that would be sacrificed by Abraham’s descendants, including the kid [gedi].
The verse is speaking of Abraham, as it is stated: “After these matters, the word of the Lord was to Abram in a vision” (Genesis 15:1). Rabbi Levi said in the name of Rabbi Ḥama: There were ruminations that took place there.²⁸⁸This was after Abraham’s victory over the four kings (see Genesis chapter 14). Who ruminated? Abraham ruminated, and said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, You made a covenant with Noah that You would not eliminate his descendants from the world, and I arose and amassed good deeds before You, and the covenant with me overrode the covenant with him.²⁸⁹Abraham had just eliminated a significant number of his descendants. Perhaps another man will arise and amass more mitzvot and good deeds than me, and the covenant with him will override the covenant with me.’ The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘“Fear not, [Abram,] I am your shield” (Genesis 15:1). From Noah I did not produce protectors and righteous people, but from you I will produce protectors and righteous people. Moreover, when your descendants perform transgressions and evil deeds, I will see who the great man among them is, who is able to say to the attribute of justice: Enough, and I will take him as collateral on their behalf, as it is stated: Eshkol, a man in whom there is everything [ish shehakol bo], Bible, Mishna, Talmud, Tosefta, and aggadot. Hakofer, who atones for the sins of Israel. “In the vineyards of Ein Gedi,”²⁹⁰The Hebrew can also be translated “for the sake of the vineyard…” and it is understood here as a reference to Israel, which is referred to as God’s vineyard (see Isaiah 5:7) (Matnot Kehuna). I take them as collateral on their behalf.’
Another matter, eshkol—ben Gezira said: This is the Holy One blessed be He, a Man in whom there is everything. Hakofer, who renounced the nations of the world and acknowledged Israel. When did He renounce the nations of the world? Say it was during the war of Yehoshafat; that is what is written: “It was thereafter that the children of Moav and the children of Amon, and with them some Amonites, came against Yehoshafat to war” (II Chronicles 20:1). You find Israel coming by virtue of Abraham, and Amon and Moav coming by virtue of Lot. These waged war with those and these fell into the hands of those. Yehoshafat, his God aided him and he prevailed. That is [what is stated] that He renounced the nations of the world. If a person will say to you that the verse is not speaking of Yehoshafat, say to him: “Ein Gedi” is stated here, and it is stated below: “In Hatzetzon Tamar, which is Ein Gedi” (II Chronicles 20:2). Just as Ein Gedi, that is stated below, the verse is speaking of the war of Yehoshafat, here, too, the verse is speaking of the war of Yehoshafat. Rabbi Levi bar Zekharya said: If, in this world, where it is written regarding the Holy One blessed be He: “For the Lord your God is a consuming fire, a zealous God” (Deuteronomy 4:24), He renounced the nations of the world and acknowledged Israel, in the future, where He is likened to dew, as it is stated: “I will be like dew for Israel” (Hosea 14:6), all the more so.

14) "before the ark cover shall he sprinkle seven times": not seven drops. "seven times": he counts seven times — one (above) and seven (below).

14) Why, then, is it written "shall he wear," "shall he gird himself," and "shall he place upon his head" (instead of including all of them in "shall he wear")? Because he is to change into different garments towards evening, we might think that if he does not have any, he should not don those of the morning in the morning; it is, therefore, written "shall he wear," "shall he gird himself," and "shall he place upon his head."

And thou shalt make an altar to burn incense upon (Exod. 30:1). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: Ointment and perfume rejoice the heart (Prov. 27:9). This verse refers to the Holy One, blessed be He, and to Israel. How is that? When the high priest was officiating on the Day of Atonement, he would place the incense in a pan and bring it into the innermost part of the Holy of Holies, as it is written: And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from off the altar. What else is written there? Ye shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of the incense may cover the ark cover (Lev. 16:12–13). What is the meaning of may cover? It is an expression that indicates forgiveness, as in the verse Thou hast covered up all their sins (Ps. 85:3). Whenever the cloud of incense ascended and spiraled upward, like a cluster of grapes, on the Day of Atonement, he knew that Israel’s sins were forgiven, as it is said: My beloved is unto me as a cluster of henna in the vineyards of En-gedi (Song 1:14). If the smoke of the incense resembled a cluster and rose straight upward, he knew that Israel was forgiven and his service was acceptable, but if the smoke of the incense did not cover the ark-cover he knew that he would die, as it is said: That the cloud of the incense may cover the ark-cover that is upon the testimony, that he die not (Lev. 16:13). Consequently, the high priest and all Israel trembled from the moment the high priest entered the innermost Sanctuary until he withdrew in peace. When he departed from the Sanctuary a great rejoicing took place among the Israelites, since it meant that it (the offering) had been received favorably, as it is said: Ointment and incense rejoice the heart (Prov. 27:9).

And thou shalt make an altar to burn incense upon (Exod. 30:1). Scripture states elsewhere in allusion to this verse: Ointment and perfume rejoice the heart (Prov. 27:9). This verse refers to the Holy One, blessed be He, and to Israel. How is that? When the high priest was officiating on the Day of Atonement, he would place the incense in a pan and bring it into the innermost part of the Holy of Holies, as it is written: And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from off the altar. What else is written there? Ye shall put the incense upon the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of the incense may cover the ark cover (Lev. 16:12–13). What is the meaning of may cover? It is an expression that indicates forgiveness, as in the verse Thou hast covered up all their sins (Ps. 85:3). Whenever the cloud of incense ascended and spiraled upward, like a cluster of grapes, on the Day of Atonement, he knew that Israel’s sins were forgiven, as it is said: My beloved is unto me as a cluster of henna in the vineyards of En-gedi (Song 1:14). If the smoke of the incense resembled a cluster and rose straight upward, he knew that Israel was forgiven and his service was acceptable, but if the smoke of the incense did not cover the ark-cover he knew that he would die, as it is said: That the cloud of the incense may cover the ark-cover that is upon the testimony, that he die not (Lev. 16:13). Consequently, the high priest and all Israel trembled from the moment the high priest entered the innermost Sanctuary until he withdrew in peace. When he departed from the Sanctuary a great rejoicing took place among the Israelites, since it meant that it (the offering) had been received favorably, as it is said: Ointment and incense rejoice the heart (Prov. 27:9).

(Gen. 19:24:) THEN THE LORD RAINED DOWN UPON SODOM < AND UPON GOMORRAH BRIMSTONE AND FIRE >…. Let our master instruct us: When a court has ordained a fast for the community so that rains may come down, and they do come down on that day, is it correct for them to finish it? Thus have our masters taught (in Ta'an. 25b [bar.]):⁶³The first half of the citation is also in Ta‘an. 3:9. IF THEY WERE FASTING, AND THE RAINS CAME DOWN BEFORE THE RISING OF THE SUN, THEY SHALL NOT FINISH IT. AFTER THE RISING OF THE SUN THEY SHALL FINISH IT. < THESE ARE > THE WORDS OF R. ME'IR, BUT R. JUDAH SAYS: BEFORE NOON THEY DO NOT COMPLETE IT; AFTER NOON THEY COMPLETE IT. And where did the generations (i.e., the sages) find support that they should fast on Monday and Thursday? < It is > simply < that >, when Israel committed that act (i.e., of the golden calf), Moses went up < onto the mountain > on a Thursday and came down on a Monday. How is it shown? R. Levi said: He went up on a Thursday. Now from Thursday through < the following > Thursday to the Thursday < after that > there are fifteen < days >. And from Sabbath eve through < the following > Sabbath eve to the Sabbath eve < after that > there are fifteen < days >, for a total of thirty. Also from Sabbath to Sabbath there are eight < days >, for a total of thirty-eight. Then a Sunday and a Monday make forty < days >⁶⁴The time Moses spent on Mount Sinai before he descended to discover Israel worshiping the golden calf. So Exod. 34:28; Deut. 9:9-11. Therefore, the sages have ruled that one should fast on Monday and on Thursday, on < the day of > Moses' ascent and on < that of > his descent. Now at the end of forty days they fasted and wept before Moses, so that the Holy One was filled with mercy for them and appointed that day for them as a day of atoning for their sins. And this was the Day of Atonement, as stated (in Lev. 16:30): FOR ON THIS DAY ATONEMENT SHALL BE MADE FOR YOU TO CLEANSE YOU. See how lovely repentance (rt.: ShVB) is! The Holy One said (in Mal. 3:7): RETURN (rt.: ShVB) UNTO ME AND I WILL RETURN (rt.: ShVB) UNTO YOU. For, if there are some sins on one's hand and that person returns to the Holy One, he credits him as if he had not sinned. Thus it is stated (in Ezek. 18:22): < NOT > ANY OF HIS SINS WHICH HE COMMITTED < SHALL BE REMEMBERED AGAINST HIM >…. But, when the Holy One has warned him a first time, and a second and a third, without him repenting, he exacts punishment from him, as stated (in Job 33:29): BEHOLD, GOD DOES ALL THESE THINGS < TWO OR THREE TIMES TO A PERSON >…. When he does not find pleasure in < such a > one, he immediately exacts punishment from him. You yourself know that it is so. When the Holy One desired to destroy Sodom and its people, Abraham stood and sought mercy for them. He thought that there might be hope for them, as stated (in Gen. 18:23): THEN ABRAHAM DREW NEAR AND SAID: < WILL YOU ALSO DESTROY THE RIGHTEOUS WITH THE WICKED > ? What is the meaning of DREW NEAR?⁶⁵Cf. Gen. R. 93:6. R. Joshua says: DREW NEAR is nothing but an expression relating to battle, as when it is stated (in II Sam. 10:13): SO JOAB AND THE PEOPLE WHO WERE WITH HIM DREW NEAR TO THE BATTLE. R. Nehemiah says: It is nothing but an expression relating to prayer, as when it is stated (in I Kings 18:36): AND IT CAME TO PASS WHEN IT WAS TIME TO PRESENT THE MEAL OFFERING, THE PROPHET ELIJAH DREW NEAR…. But the sages say: DREW NEAR is nothing but an expression of entreaty, as when it is stated (in Gen. 44:18): THEN JUDAH DREW NEAR UNTO HIM AND SAID: < PRAY, MY LORD, PLEASE LET YOUR SERVANT SPEAK >…. Abraham said to the Holy One (in Gen. 18:25): FAR BE IT FROM YOU < TO DO SUCH A THING >…. And he sought mercy for them until (in vss. 26-33) < his request > went down from fifty to ten. When he found no merit for them, the Divine Presence departed from him, as stated (in vs. 33): THEN THE LORD WENT AWAY WHEN HE HAD FINISHED…. Immediately the retribution came upon them. {Thus it is stated} [Where is it shown? From what we read on the matter] (in Gen. 19:24): THEN THE LORD RAINED DOWN UPON SODOM < AND UPON GOMORRAH BRIMSTONE AND FIRE >.

23 (Numb. 14:21, 23) “Nevertheless, as I live [It is also written (in Numb. 32:11), “Surely none of] the people who came up from Egypt, from twenty years old and up, [shall see the land].” [From] twenty years – whether one was in agreement or was not in agreement (with the spies), [he did not enter the land]. Less than twenty years, if one had not gotten two [pubic] hairs – whether one was in agreement or was not in agreement (with the spies), [he did enter the land]. If one had gotten two [pubic] hairs but was less than twenty,³⁴On the concept that moral responsibility comes at twenty, see Rashi on Gen. 23:1. [only] if he was in agreement with them, he did not enter [the land]. But nonetheless, not one of them died at less than sixty.³⁵I.e., the Holy One subsequently had compassion on all under twenty, so that they outlived the forty wilderness years to die in the land of Israel. So Enoch Zundel in his commentary, ‘Ets Yosef, on Numb. R. 16:23(14). Come and see the difference [as it is stated] (in Mal. 3:18), “between righteous and wicked […].” It is comparable to a certain matron³⁶Lat.: matrona. who had a bondmaid. Now her husband went to a country overseas. All night the bondmaid said to the matron, “I am fairer than you and the king loves me more than you.” That matron said to her, “When the morning comes, you shall know who is fairer and whom the king loves.” Similarly do the nations of the world say to Israel, “As for us, our deeds are more beautiful, and us does the Holy One, blessed be He, desire.” Therefore Isaiah has said, “When the morning comes, we shall know whom the Holy One, blessed be He, desires,” as stated (in Is. 21:12), “The watchman said, ‘The morning comes […].’” When the world to come arrives, which is called morning,³⁷See Targum Pss. 90:14; 101:8. we shall know, as stated (according to Mal. 3:18), “Then you shall again see [the difference] between righteous and wicked.” It is written (in Ps. 62:10), “But humans are mere vanity […].” R Hiyya³⁸Since the authority generally cited as R. Hiyya lived sometime before R. Levi, the R. Hiyya cited here could not be he. This Hiyya may well be R. Hiyya the father of R. Berekhiah the Priest. said in the name of R. Levi, “All vanities which Israel does all the days of the year are (ibid., cont.) to go up (i.e., vanish) on the scales (mozenayim).” The Holy One, blessed be He, pardons them in the constellation Libra (Mozenayim), in the month of Tishri. It is so stated (in Lev. 16:30), “For on this day atonement shall be made for you to cleanse you.”

16 "and the fire of the altar shall be kindled thereby": Whence is it derived that the fire of the inner (incense) altar is to be kindled only from that of the outer altar? From: "the fire of the altar shall be kindled thereby." Whence is it derived that the same applies to the fire (i.e., the coals) of the coal pan (which were brought into the holy of holies for the burning of the incense of Yom Kippur) and to the (fire of) the menorah? It follows, viz.: "Burning" is stated in respect to the inner altar, viz. (Shemoth 30:7): "shall he burn it" (the incense, on the inner altar), and "burning" is stated in respect to the coal pan and the menorah. Just as the fire for the inner altar comes from the outer altar, so the fire for the coal pan and the menorah comes from the outer altar. — But why not go in this direction: "Burning" is stated in respect to the inner altar and "burning" is stated in respect to the coal pan and to the menorah — Just as the fire for the inner altar comes from the altar outside of it, so the fire for the coal pan and the menorah should come from the altar (directly) outside of them (i.e., the inner altar)! It is, therefore, (to negate this) written (in respect to the outer altar, Vayikra 6:6): "A continuous fire shall burn upon the altar; it shall not be extinguished" — The continuous fire, too, that I told you of (in respect to the menorah, Shemoth 27:20) should be only from the outer altar. This suffices for the fire of the menorah. Whence do I derive the same for (that of) the coal pan? It follows, viz.: "Fire" is written in respect to the menorah, and "fire" is written in respect to the coal pan. Just as there (the menorah, the fire is taken from that) on the outer altar; here, too, (in respect to the coal pan, the fire is taken from that) on the outer altar. — But why not go in this direction: "Fire" is stated in respect to the incense, and "fire" is stated in respect to the coal pan. Just as there (in respect to the incense (altar), the fire is taken from that) nearest it (i.e., the outer altar); here, too, (in respect to the coal pan, the fire should be taken from that altar) nearest it (i.e., the inner altar)! It is, therefore, (to negate this) written(Vayikra 16:12): "And he shall take a full coal pan of coals of fire from off the altar before the L–rd." Which is the altar, part of which, but not all of which, is "before the L–rd"? The outer altar, (which faces the sanctuary, as opposed to the inner altar, which is entirely in the sanctuary).

Not good[, the adam being alone]” [Gn 2:18]: Taught [R’ Yaakov]: Anyone (man) that has no woman lives without good . . . R’ Simon in the name of R’ Yehoshua ben Levi said: Even without peace . . . R’ Yehoshua of Sakhnin in the name of R’ Levi said: Even without life . . . R’ Chiya bar Gomdi said: He is not even a whole human / adam shalem, for it says: “And He blessed them and called their name Adam”. [Gn 5:2]

Another interpretation: (Ezek. 36:17:) THEIR WAY BEFORE ME WAS LIKE THE UNCLEANNESS OF A MENSTRUOUS WOMAN, and not like the uncleanness of a corpse. With a corpse in the house, a high priest does not enter there; but in the case of a menstruous woman, a high priest enters into the house with her and sits with her on the couch,⁶⁰‘YSTWW’, probably from the Gk.: histion, which means “something woven.” but on condition that it not be shaken (when they sit on it). So if Israel were compared to the impurity of death, the Divine Presence would never return upon them; however, they are compared to the menstruant, because there is cleansing for her in a mikveh, so that the priest may be with her in the house and not be afraid. Thus the Divine Presence dwells with Israel, even though they are more unclean than those who serve stars, as stated (in Lev. 16:16): < THE TENT OF MEETING > THAT DWELLS WITH THEM IN THE MIDST OF THEIR UNCLEANNESSES. Our masters have said: When Israel was in Egypt, the women did not see menstrual blood, because the fear of Egypt was upon them. And also after Israel left Egypt, they did not see menstruation in the desert, because the Divine Presence was among them. Moreover, at first the women accepted the Torah. It is so stated (in Exod. 19:3): THUS SHALL YOU SAY TO THE HOUSE OF JACOB. These are the women.⁶¹Exod. R. 28:2. Cf. Shab. 118b: “R. Jose said:…, but my wife < I called > my house.” (Ibid., cont.): AND DECLARE TO THE SONS OF ISRAEL. These are the men. And so it says (in Cant. 6:10): TERRIBLE⁶²Buber, n. 91, points out that ‘ayummah (TERRIBLE) is seen as related to ‘emah (“fear”), in that the fear of the Divine Presence was upon them. LIKE BANNERED HOSTS. Now about them it is stated (in Cant. 4:12): A LOCKED GARDEN [IS MY SISTER, MY BRIDE], A LOCKED FOUNTAIN, [A SEALED SPRING]. The Holy One said to Israel: In this world you were clean and have returned to uncleanness; but in the world to come I myself will cleanse [you] so that you shall not ever become unclean. Thus it is stated (in Ezek. 36:25): I WILL SPRINKLE PURE WATER UPON YOU, AND YOU SHALL BE PURE; I WILL PURIFY YOU FROM ALL YOUR UNCLEANNESSES AND FROM ALL YOUR IDOLS.

21 The Seers (i.e., the prophets) were the ones who said the doubled letters, mantzepakh (mem, nun, tzadi, peh, and kaf, which are the letters that have a different form when they appear at the end of a word). [The doubling of kaf that is found in Genesis 12:1,] "Lekh lekha (Go for yourself)," hints to Avraham that he will father Yitschak at one hundred years [of age] (as the numerical value of these two words is one hundred). [The doubling of mem that is found in Genesis 26:16,] "ki atsamta memenu (as you have become more powerful than us)" is a hint [to Yitschak] that hints that he and his seed will be powerful in both worlds. The doubling of nun [that is found in Genesis 32:12,] "Hatsileini na (Save me)" [is a hint to] Yaakov, [that] he will be saved in both worlds. The doubling of peh [that is found in Exodus 3:15, is a hint to] Israel, to Moshe,"pakod pakadeti etchem (I have surely remembered you)." The doubling of tsadi [that is found in Zachariah 6:12,] "hinei eesh, Tsemach shemo, [ou'metachtav yitsmach] (behold, a man called Branch shall branch out from the place where he is,)" is [referring to] the Messiah. And so is it stated (Jermiah 23:5), "vahikimoti leDavid tsemach tsadeek [...] (and I will raise up a true branch of David [...])." "The leader of fifty" (Isaiah 3:3). Twenty-four books (of the Bible); add to them eleven of the thirteen [books of the minor prophets] - besides Yonah which is by itself - and six orders of the Mishnah and nine chapters of Torat Kohanim, behold fifty. "Sixty were the queens," (Song of Songs 6:8), sixty tractates; "and eighty were the concubines," eighty study halls that were in Jerusalem corresponding to its gates.; and maidens without number," the study outside. "Behold the bed of Shlomo, sixty warriors" (Song of Songs 3:7). [This corresponds to] the sixty letters of the priestly blessing (Numbers 6:24-26). Three hundred and eighteen [souls mentioned in Genesis 14:14 is the numerical equivalent of] Eliezer. "Inasmuch (ekev) as Avraham obeyed Me and kept My charge: My commandments, My laws, and My teachings" (Genesis 26:5) - he recognized him when he was three (the numerical equivalent of ekev, being three less than that of Avraham). The Satan (HaSatan) has the numerical equivalent of three hundred and sixty-four, the count of the days of the solar year that he rules over all of them to slander, excepting Yom Kippur. Rabbi Ami beiRabbi Abba said, "Avraham was missing five organs before he was circumcised and [before] he fathered. The [letter] hay (with a numerical value of five) was added [to his name] and he became complete and fathered [corresponding to the complete set of organs, two hundred and forty-eight], the numerical count of his letters." "A woman of valor is the crown of her husband" (Proverbs 12:4) - that is Sarah. Her name had been Sarai. Two Amoraim (later rabbinic teachers) differed. One said, "The [letter] yod (with a numerical count of ten that was taken from her) was divided into two, [to give] a hay to Avaraham and a hay to Sarah." And [the other] said, "The yod that was taken from Sarah raised a protest until Yehoshua came and Moshe added to him a yod - the Lord save you from the counsel of the [other] spies. [The significance of the letters in the name,] Yitschak [is as follows]: Yod (with a numerical count of ten) corresponds to the ten trials [of Avraham]. [The letter] tsadi (with a numerical count of ninety), [as] Sarah was ninety when he was born. [The letter] chet (with a numerical count of eight), [as] he was circumcised on the eighth day. And the letter kof (with a numerical count of one hundred), [as] Avraham was a hundred years old when he was born. Yaakov was called according to [the significance of the letters of] his [own] name: Yod [corresponds to] the tenth of his offspring going backwards. Count from (the last son), Binaymin to Levi - there are ten sons, [and Levi] was the tenth. [The letter] ayin (with a numerical count of seventy corresponds to the number of offspring he took to Egypt), "with seventy souls" (Deuteronomy 10:22). Kof corresponds to the [number of the] letters of the blessing [that he received minus the name of God, "And may He give you etc." (Genesis 27:28)]. [The letter] bet (with a numerical count of two) remains, corresponding to two angels (that he saw on the ladder in his dream) rising. There were six hundred and thirteen commandments in the tablets - corresponding to the letters from "I am" (Exodus 20:2) to "to your neighbor" (Exodus 20:14) - corresponding to the six hundred and thirteen commandments - no less and no more. And they were all given to Moshe at [Mount] Sinai; and in them are statutes and judgments, Torah and Mishnah, Talmud and aggadah. "The fear of the Lord is his treasure" (Isaiah 33:6). There is no greater characteristic than fear and humility, [as it is stated] (Deuteronomy 10:12), "And now Israel, what does the Lord, your God, ask of you besides to fear Him [...]." "The fear of" (Yirat) has a numerical value of six hundred and eleven; and Torah has a numerical value of six hundred and eleven - and Torah and fear [of God] along with them, behold that is six hundred and thirteen. [The numerical value of] fringes (tsitsit) [is six hundred] - the rabbis taught: [Add] eight [strings] and five [knots], behold that is six hundred and thirteen. The days of Avraham were one hundred and seventy-five years, [of] Yitzchak were one hundred and eighty years [and of] Yaakov were a hundred and forty-seven years. When you put them together, it is found to be five hundred and two years. And so is the distance of the the heavens to the earth, "like the the days of the heavens above the earth" (Deuteronomy 11:21). "[The man (David)] raised on high" (II Samuel 23:1) - [high (al) has a numerical value of one hundred] corresponding to one hundred blessings. As on every day, one hundred men of Israel were dying. [So] David came and ordained [the daily saying of] one hundred blessings. Once he ordained them, the pestilence ceased. High (al) [corresponds to] the yoke (ulah) of Torah and the yoke of suffering. "Forgive all guilt and take the good (tov) that we pay with the words of our lips" (Hosea 14:3). Israel said, "Master of the world, at the time that the Temple existed, we would offer a sacrifice and be cleansed. But now all we have in our hand is prayer." The numerical value of tov is seventeen. Prayer [consists of] nineteen blessings. Take away from them the blessing for the malfeasers that was composed at Yavneh, and "Let the sprout of David blossom," which they ordained after it for the sake of "Probe me, Lord, and try me" (Psalms 26:2). Rabbi Simon says, "Take tov [in at-bash (matching letters based on how close they are to the center of the alphabet), which is the same] as the numerical value of soul (nefesh). Israel said, 'At the time that the Temple existed, we would incinerate the fats and the innards and be cleansed. But now behold our fat, our blood and our souls. May it be Your will that it be atonement for us and "that we pay with the words of our lips" (Hosea 14:3).'" "And the Lord gave her conception (herayon)" (Ruth 4:13). [Herayon] has a numerical value of two hundred and seventy one (the number of the days of the nine months of birthing). The measure of the water of a mikveh (ritual bath) is forty seah [corresponding to the forty mentions] of well water, written in the Torah. And [the volume of] how many eggs is the measure of the mikveh? Five thousand seven hundred and sixty. Each seah is a hundred and forty-four eggs. Forty-three and a fifth eggs is the measure of [what is required for] challah [tithe]. And from where [do we know] that a mikveh requires forty seah? As it is written (Isaiah 8:6), "Since this nation has rejected the waters of Shiloach that flow gently (le'at)." The numerical value [of le'at] is forty. And one who separates the measure of the challah [tithe] must separate one part in forty three and a fifth from Torah writ like the [numerical] value of challah. The main categories of work [on Shabbat] are forty minus one (thirty-nine), as it is written (Exodus 35:1), "These (eleh) are the things which the Lord commanded." [The numerical count of] "eleh" is thirty-six; "things" (being plural) is two; "the things" [indicates an additional] one - behold, forty minus one. "He shall strike him forty, he shall not add" (Deuteronomy 25:3), corresponds to the forty curses that the snake, Chava, Adam and the ground were cursed - and the sages lessened one, because of "he shall not add." Those [judges] advocating innocence are more those advocating guilt. [For] it is best for the two to come and push off one. Seshach is Bavel (Babylon) [according to] its numerical value in at-bash. Tavel is Ramlah [according to] its numerical value in al-bam (another numerical scheme). "Thus (bezot) shall Aaron enter the shrine; with a bull of the herd for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering" (Leviticus 16:3). Bezot (which has a numerical count of four hundred and ten) is a hint to the first Temple that stood for four hundred and ten years.

5 R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “There are four things that the evil drive would refute [as irrational], and for each of them is written [the word,] huqqah (i.e., an unquestioned statute).⁴⁷Although Huqqah is normally translated simply as “statute,” the word more fully denotes a command that demands implicit and unquestioned obedience. Huqqah is therefore translated “unquestioned statute” throughout this section. Now these concern the following: (1) the nakedness of a brother's wife, (2) diverse kinds, (3) the scapegoat, and (4) the red heifer.”⁴⁸PR 14:12; see Yoma 67b. In regard to the nakedness of a brother's wife, it is written (in Lev. 18:16), “[You shall not uncover] the nakedness of your brother's wife”; [yet if the brother dies] without children [it is written] (in Deut. 25:5), “her brother-in-law shall have sexual intercourse with her [and take her for a wife].” And it is written about the sexual prohibitions (in Lev. 18:5), “And you shall keep [all] My unquestioned statutes [...].” In regard to diverse kinds, it is written (in Deut. 22:11), “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, [wool and flax together]”; yet a linen cloak⁴⁹Gk.: sindon. with [wool] tassels is permitted.⁵⁰See Numb. 15:37-38. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. [Thus it is written (in Lev. 19:19),] “You shall keep My unquestioned statute. [You shall not mate your cattle with a different kind…, nor shall you wear a garment with diverse kinds of interwoven stuff].” In regard to the scapegoat, it is written (in Lev. 16:26), “And the one who sets the azazel-goat free shall wash his clothes”; yet it is [the goat] itself that atones for others. And for [this commandment also] it is written (in Lev. 16:34), “And this shall be to you an unquestioned statute forever.” In regard to the red heifer, where is it shown? Since we are taught (in Parah 4:4), “All engaged with the [rite of the red] heifer from beginning to end render [their] garments unclean”; yet it is [the heifer] itself that purifies garments. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Numb. 19:2), “This is an unquestioned statute of the Torah.”

5 R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “There are four things that the evil drive would refute [as irrational], and for each of them is written [the word,] huqqah (i.e., an unquestioned statute).⁴⁷Although Huqqah is normally translated simply as “statute,” the word more fully denotes a command that demands implicit and unquestioned obedience. Huqqah is therefore translated “unquestioned statute” throughout this section. Now these concern the following: (1) the nakedness of a brother's wife, (2) diverse kinds, (3) the scapegoat, and (4) the red heifer.”⁴⁸PR 14:12; see Yoma 67b. In regard to the nakedness of a brother's wife, it is written (in Lev. 18:16), “[You shall not uncover] the nakedness of your brother's wife”; [yet if the brother dies] without children [it is written] (in Deut. 25:5), “her brother-in-law shall have sexual intercourse with her [and take her for a wife].” And it is written about the sexual prohibitions (in Lev. 18:5), “And you shall keep [all] My unquestioned statutes [...].” In regard to diverse kinds, it is written (in Deut. 22:11), “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, [wool and flax together]”; yet a linen cloak⁴⁹Gk.: sindon. with [wool] tassels is permitted.⁵⁰See Numb. 15:37-38. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. [Thus it is written (in Lev. 19:19),] “You shall keep My unquestioned statute. [You shall not mate your cattle with a different kind…, nor shall you wear a garment with diverse kinds of interwoven stuff].” In regard to the scapegoat, it is written (in Lev. 16:26), “And the one who sets the azazel-goat free shall wash his clothes”; yet it is [the goat] itself that atones for others. And for [this commandment also] it is written (in Lev. 16:34), “And this shall be to you an unquestioned statute forever.” In regard to the red heifer, where is it shown? Since we are taught (in Parah 4:4), “All engaged with the [rite of the red] heifer from beginning to end render [their] garments unclean”; yet it is [the heifer] itself that purifies garments. And for [this commandment also] it is written, [that it is] an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Numb. 19:2), “This is an unquestioned statute of the Torah.”

אֱלִישֶׁבַע בַּת עֲמִינָדָב....Elisheva bat Aminadav did not have joy in the world. she witnessed 'five crowns' in one day: her brother-in-law (Moshe) was a king, her brother (Nachshon) was a prince, her husband (Aron) was a Kohen Gadol, her two sons were both Deputy Kohanim, Pinchas her grandson was a war priest. But when her sons entered to draw near (to Gd) they were burnt, her joy was turned to mourning. as it is written, "after the death of the two sons of Aaron." Vayikra 16:1

Hananiah the son of Hakinai and Rabbi Shimon the son of Yohai went to study Torah with Rabbi Akiva in Bnei Brak. They were there for 13 years. Rabbi Shimon the son of Yohai used to send letters to his wife, and used to know what was happening to his family. Hananiah the son of Hakinai did not send letters to his wife and did not know what was happening to his family. His wife sent to him, "Your daughter is grown; come and find her a match." [He wished to enter his house but found that it was turned in a different direction.] What did he do? He went and sat by the well. He heard the voices of the water-drawers saying, "Daughter of Hakinai, fill your pitcher and ascend." She went, and he went after her, until he came into his house. Just as his wife saw him, her soul left her. {There are those who say that it returned}

What is written above this? “And the Lord said to Moses: Speak to your brother Aaron…” (Leviticus 16:2) R’ Avin said: He said to him - go and comfort him with words, as it says “Speak to the heart of Jerusalem…” (Isaiah 40:2) “…that he should not come at all times…” (Leviticus 16:2) R’ Yehudah bar R’ Simon said: Moshe was greatly distressed by this. He said: oy! Perhaps Aharon my brother has been driven out from the inner space at all times! There is a time corresponding to the hour “…that he should not come at all times…” (ibid.) There is a time corresponding to the day “And water by measure you shall drink…” (Ezekiel 4:11) There is a time corresponding to the year, as it says “And it was, at the return of the year…” (Samuel II 11:1) There is a time corresponding to twelve years “Until the time when His word came…” (Psalms 105:19) There is a time corresponding to the seventy years, as it says “…since the destruction of Jerusalem seventy years.” (Daniel 9:2) And it says “…until the time of his own land come…” (Jeremiah 27:7) There is a time corresponding to eternity “You gave joy into my heart from the time that their corn…” (Psalms 4:8) The Holy One said to Moshe: it is not as you think. This is not a time of the hour, the day, the year, of twelve years, seventy years or of eternity. Rather, at any time which he wants to enter he may enter, but he must do it with this procedure. R’ Yehudah bar R’ Elazar said: with thirty-six bells and thirty-six pomegranates. The Rabbis say: with seventy-two bells and seventy-two pomegranates.

(Lev. 23:40:) “And you shall take for yourselves on the first day.” Is it the first [day]?⁹⁷Lev. R. 30:7; PRK 27:7. Is it not the fifteenth day? So how is it the first? It is simply the first for the reckoning (heshbon) of sins. R. Mani and R. Joshua of Sikhnin in the name of R. Levi said a parable, “To what is the matter comparable?⁹⁸Eccl. R. 9:7:1. To a province which owed back taxes⁹⁹Gk.: loipas. to the king. [When] the king sent to collect [the sum], they did not hand it over, because the bill was large. So it happened the first time, and a second time; when he sent [for it], they did not hand it over. What did the king do? He said to his courtiers,¹⁰⁰Literally, “children of the palace (palation).” Cf. Lat.: palatium; Gk: palation. ‘Arise and let us move against them.’ While they were traveling about ten mil¹⁰¹Milin; cf. Lat.: mille passus. [away], the people of the province heard [what was happening]. What did they do? The nobles of the province began to go to a meeting¹⁰²Gk.: apante. with the king. He said to them, ‘Who are you?’ They said to him, ‘We are people of such and such a province where you sent to collect our taxes.’ He said to them, ‘So what do you want?’ They said to him, ‘If you please, show us kindness, because we have nothing to hand over.’ He said to them, ‘I will remit half for you.’ While he was [still] coming, the ruffians of the province went out and greeted him about five mil [away]. He said to them, ‘Who are you?’ They said to him, ‘We are people of such and such a province where you sent to collect our taxes, but we don’t have the ability to stand [up to the demand]; if you please, have mercy upon us.’ He said to them, ‘I have already remitted half [your debt], but for your sake I am remitting half of [the remaining] half. While he was [still] coming, all the people of the province came out to him, [both] large and small. He said to them, ‘What do you want?’ They said to him, ‘Our Lord king, we don’t have the ability to remit what we owe you.’ He said to them, ‘I have already remitted half plus half of [the remaining] half, but for your sake I am remitting everything. However, from now on there [begins] a new account (heshbon).’ This king is [the supreme King of kings], the Holy One, blessed be He. The people of his province? These are Israel, who acquire sins during all of the whole year. What does the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He says, ‘Do penance at the beginning of the year.’ So they come in submission on the Day of Atonement, when they humble themselves and do penance. Then the Holy One, blessed be He, forgives them. And what do they do? The eve of Rosh Hashanah, the great ones of the generation fast, and the Holy One, blessed be He, relinquishes [Israel] a third of its sins. And from Rosh Hashanah to the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), individuals fast, and the Holy One, blessed be He, relinquishes [another] third of their sins. And on the Day of Atonement, all of Israel fasts and requests mercy, men, women and infants. And [so] the Holy One, blessed be He, relinquishes everything; as it is written (in Leviticus 16:30), ‘As upon this day, there will be atonement for you….’ What does Israel do [then]? They all take their lulavim on the first day of the festival and render praise to the Holy One, blessed be He. Thus He is reconciled to them and forgives them. He says to them, ‘See, I have relinquished all your former sins for you. However, from now on there is a new account (heshbon).’ Thus it is stated (in Lev. 23:40), ‘And you shall take for yourselves on the first day.’ [It is] first for the reckoning (heshbon) of sins.’” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, “In this world I have told you to make a sukkah in order to pay me my remuneration for what I have done for you. It is so stated (in Lev. 23:42-43), ‘You shall dwell in sukkot for seven days […]. In order that your generations may know that I had [the Children of Israel] dwell in sukkot.’ So I reckon it to your credit, as if you are rendering payment to Me. But in the world to come I will appear over you like a sukkah, as stated (in Is. 4:6), ‘There shall be a sukkah as a shade from the heat by day.’”

(Exodus 19:22) "And also the Cohanim, who draw near to the L rd": We are hereby apprised that the Cohanim are not included in "the people" (above, 21). And thus is it written (Leviticus 16:33) "for the Cohanim and for all the people of the congregation shall he make atonement" — the Cohanim are not included in "the people." And who are "the Cohanim"? R. Yehoshua b. Karcha says: Nadav and Avihu, (i.e., even the most prominent of them.) (For) it is not written (merely) "the Cohanim," but "the Cohanim who draw near to the L rd." "And also": to include the elders with them.

(Numb. 4:18:) “Do not cut off.” Let our master instruct us: In the case of one who commits a transgression punishable with excision according to the Torah, how do they receive pardon [and] become freed from their excision?¹¹⁹See Numb. R. 5:4. Thus have our masters taught (in Mak. 3:15): All who are liable to excision, when they have been scourged, are exempt from their excision, as stated (in Deut. 25:2-3), “then the judge shall have him lie down…. He may give him forty lashes but no more…; then your brother would be degraded.” When he has been scourged, then he is [again] your brother. And why forty lashes? It is simply that, because this adam was forty days in creation¹²⁰The Rabbis believed that the fetus takes forty days to develop into a human shape. See Nid. 3:7; Ber. 60a; Men. 99b; also Philo, Quaestiones, Gen. 1:25. and transgressed against the Torah, which was forty days in the giving, he will be given forty lashes and be exempt from his punishment (i.e., from excision). And so you find in the case of the first Adam. When he was commanded and told (in Gen. 2:17), “But from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat …,” he incurred the sentence of death; and the world was scourged with forty punishments: ten for Adam, ten for Eve, ten for the serpent, ten for the land. Therefore, when a person commits one of the transgressions [punishable by death], he is scourged with forty lashes. And so you find with each and every thing that the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded Moses, [there were] warnings and punishments. It is written concerning the Sabbath (Exod. 20:8), “Remember the Sabbath day,” as a warning; and as a punishment (there is Exod. 31:14), “whoever profanes it shall surely be put to death.” They came to the desert and (according to Numb. 15:32) found one gathering [wood on the Sabbath], but Moses did not know by what death he should be killed. However, (according to Lev. 24:12) “They left him in custody [because it was not clear what should be done to him.]” The Holy One, blessed be He, said (in vs. 35), “The person shall surely be put to death; [all the congregation] shall stone him with stones.” Immediately Moses rose in prayer and said, “Sovereign of the world, if a man should so sin, should he [really] be stoned? Behold, they would be destroyed. Make an [other] arrangement for them.” He said to him, “Let them be scourged with forty lashes, and they will be exempt from excision.” Similarly when the children of Aaron died, the tribe of Kohath saw them. They began yelling to Moses, saying, “Are we to die like that?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Just as I have made an [alternate] arrangement for Aaron, as stated (in 16:3), ‘In this way shall Aaron come [into the sanctuary]…’; so also for the Kohathite families I am making a similar arrangement, lest they die, as stated (Numb. 4:19), ‘Do this for them (i.e., for the Kohathites) that they may live and not die….’” Where is it shown? From what they read on the matter (in Numb. 4:18), “Do not cut off….”

In regard to the nakedness of a brother's wife, where is it shown? Where it is written (in Lev. 18:16): YOU SHALL NOT UNCOVER THE NAKEDNESS OF YOUR BROTHER's WIFE; yet it is written (in Deut. 25:5): HER BROTHER-IN-LAW SHALL HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH HER <AND TAKE HER FOR A WIFE>. During <her husband's> lifetime, she is forbidden; <but> upon <his> death with no children, she is permitted to <a brother-in-law>. Moreover, for <this commandment> it is written <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Lev. 20:22): AND YOU SHALL KEEP [ALL] MY UNQUESTIONED STATUTES.
In regard to diverse kinds, where is it shown? Where it is written (in Deut. 22:11): AND YOU SHALL NOT WEAR INTERWOVEN STUFF, <WOOL AND FLAX TOGETHER>; yet a linen cloak¹¹⁸Gk.: sindon. with <wool> tassels is permitted.¹¹⁹See Numb. 15:37-38. Moreover, for <this commandment also> it is written, <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Lev. 19:19): YOU SHALL KEEP MY UNQUESTIONED STATUTE. YOU SHALL NOT MATE YOUR CATTLE WITH A DIFFERENT KIND…, [NOR SHALL YOU WEAR A GARMENT WITH DIVERSE KINDS OF INTERWOVEN STUFF].
In regard to the scapegoat, where is it shown? Where it is written (in Lev. 16:26): AND THE ONE WHO SETS THE AZAZEL-GOAT FREE <SHALL WASH HIS CLOTHES, BATHE HIS FLESH IN WATER, AND AFTER THAT MAY COME INTO THE CAMP>; yet it is <the goat> itself that atones for others. Moreover, for <this commandment also> it is written, <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Lev. 16:34): AND THIS SHALL BE TO YOU AN UNQUESTIONED STATUTE FOREVER.
In regard to the <red> heifer, where is it shown? There where we are taught (in Parah 4:4): ALL ENGAGED WITH THE <RITE OF THE RED> HEIFER FROM BEGINNING TO END RENDER <THEIR> GARMENTS UNCLEAN; yet it is <the heifer> itself that purifies <what is> unclean. Moreover, for <this commandment also> it is written, <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Numb. 19:2): THIS IS AN UNQUESTIONED STATUTE OF THE TORAH.

In regard to the nakedness of a brother's wife, where is it shown? Where it is written (in Lev. 18:16): YOU SHALL NOT UNCOVER THE NAKEDNESS OF YOUR BROTHER's WIFE; yet it is written (in Deut. 25:5): HER BROTHER-IN-LAW SHALL HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH HER <AND TAKE HER FOR A WIFE>. During <her husband's> lifetime, she is forbidden; <but> upon <his> death with no children, she is permitted to <a brother-in-law>. Moreover, for <this commandment> it is written <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Lev. 20:22): AND YOU SHALL KEEP [ALL] MY UNQUESTIONED STATUTES.
In regard to diverse kinds, where is it shown? Where it is written (in Deut. 22:11): AND YOU SHALL NOT WEAR INTERWOVEN STUFF, <WOOL AND FLAX TOGETHER>; yet a linen cloak¹¹⁸Gk.: sindon. with <wool> tassels is permitted.¹¹⁹See Numb. 15:37-38. Moreover, for <this commandment also> it is written, <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Lev. 19:19): YOU SHALL KEEP MY UNQUESTIONED STATUTE. YOU SHALL NOT MATE YOUR CATTLE WITH A DIFFERENT KIND…, [NOR SHALL YOU WEAR A GARMENT WITH DIVERSE KINDS OF INTERWOVEN STUFF].
In regard to the scapegoat, where is it shown? Where it is written (in Lev. 16:26): AND THE ONE WHO SETS THE AZAZEL-GOAT FREE <SHALL WASH HIS CLOTHES, BATHE HIS FLESH IN WATER, AND AFTER THAT MAY COME INTO THE CAMP>; yet it is <the goat> itself that atones for others. Moreover, for <this commandment also> it is written, <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Lev. 16:34): AND THIS SHALL BE TO YOU AN UNQUESTIONED STATUTE FOREVER.
In regard to the <red> heifer, where is it shown? There where we are taught (in Parah 4:4): ALL ENGAGED WITH THE <RITE OF THE RED> HEIFER FROM BEGINNING TO END RENDER <THEIR> GARMENTS UNCLEAN; yet it is <the heifer> itself that purifies <what is> unclean. Moreover, for <this commandment also> it is written, <that it is> an unquestioned statute. Thus it is written (in Numb. 19:2): THIS IS AN UNQUESTIONED STATUTE OF THE TORAH.

(Exodus 12:25) "And it shall be, when you come to the land": The service is contingent upon their entering the land and thereafter. (In the desert they were obliged to observe only one Pesach, in the second year, by Divine command.) "as He has spoken": And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 6:8) "and I shall bring you to the land, etc." Similarly, (Ibid. 16:23) "This is what the L rd has spoken: 'A resting, a holy Sabbath, etc.'" And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 5) "And it shall be on the sixth day that they shall prepare, etc." Similarly, (Leviticus 10:3) "This is as the L rd spoke: With My near ones I will be sanctified." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 29:43) "And I will be appointed there for the children of Israel and it (the mishkan) will be sanctified by My glory" (i.e., by My glorifiers). Similarly, (Devarim 11:25) "The L rd your G d will put the dread and fear of you over the whole land … as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 23:27) "My fright shall I send before you, and I shall confound all the people, etc." (Devarim 12:20) "When the L rd your G d broadens your boundary, as he spoke to you, etc." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 34:24) "for I shall drive out nations from before you and I shall broaden your boundary," (Ibid. 23:31) "And I shall set your boundary from the Red Sea, etc." Similarly, (Devarim 15:6) "for the L rd your G d will bless you as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 7:14) "Blessed shall you be over all other peoples." Similarly (Ibid. 26:18) "and the L rd has affirmed this day to make you His chosen people as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 19:5) "then you shall be to Me chosen above all the peoples." Similarly (Devarim 26:19) "and to place you higher than all the nations … as He spoke." And whence did He speak it? (Ibid. 28:13) "And the L rd will make you the head, and not the tail. Similarly, (Isaiah 1:2) "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth, as the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:1) "Hear, O heavens, and I shall speak." Similarly, (Isaiah 40:5) "The glory of the L rd shall appear, and all flesh will behold as one, for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:39) "See, now, that I — I am He, and there is no god beside Me." Similarly, (Isaiah 1:19-20) "If you acquiesce and pay heed, the good of the earth will you eat. But if you refuse and rebel, the sword will devour you; for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Leviticus 26:25) "… I will bring against you an avenging sword, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 25:8) "He will destroy death forever … for the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:39) "I put to death and I bring to life, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 58:14) "then you will rejoice in the L rd, and I will 'ride' you on the heights of the earth, etc." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:13) "He will 'ride' him on the heights of the earth, etc." Similarly, (Ezekiel 39:8) "Behold, it has come; it has arrived, says the L rd G d. This is the day of which I spoke." And where did He speak of it? (Devarim 32:42) "I will make My arrows drunk with blood, etc." Similarly, (Michah 4:4) "and each man will sit under his grapevine … for the mouth of the L rd of hosts has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Leviticus 26:6) "And I will place peace in the land, etc." Similarly, (Ovadiah 1:18) "And there will be no survivor of the house of Esav, for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Numbers 24:18-19) "And Edom (Esav) will become an inheritance … and a victor will issue from Jacob and will destroy all trace of Ir." Similarly, (Genesis 21:1) "And the L rd remembered Sarah (for motherhood) as He had said." "And where did He say it? (Ibid. 17:19) "And G d said: But Sarah your wife will bear, etc." Similarly, (Ibid. 21:1) "And the L rd did for Sarah as He had spoken." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 15:4) "And the 'speaking' of the L rd was to him. This one (Ishmail) will not inherit you, etc." Similarly, (Yoel 4:8) "and I will sell your sons and your daughters, etc." And where did he speak it? (Genesis 9:25) "And he (Noach) said: Cursed is Canaan. A servant of servants will he be to his brothers." Similarly, (Devarim 17:16) "And the L rd said to you: You will not go back this way (to Egypt) again." And where did He say it? (Exodus 14:13) "For your seeing Egypt is (only) this day. You will see them no more forever." Similarly, (Isaiah 65:25) "The wolf and the lamb will graze together…said the L rd." And where did He say it? (Leviticus 26:6) "I will cut off wild beasts from the land." Similarly, (I Kings 11:2) "… of the nations of which the L rd said … You shall not come among them, etc." And where did He say it? (Devarim 7:3) "And you shall not intermarry with them, etc." Similarly, (I Kings 8:12) "The L rd has said that He will dwell in a thick cloud." And where did He say it? (Leviticus 16:2) "For in a thick cloud will I appear upon the (ark) cover." Similarly, (Malachi 3:17) "'and they will be Mine,' said the L rd." And where did He say it? (Exodus 19:5) "And you will be unto Me, chosen, etc." Similarly, (Yoel 3:5) "And all who call in the name of the L rd … as the L rd said." And where did He say it? (Devarim 28:10) "And all the peoples of the earth will see that the L rd's name is called upon you, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 66:20-21) "And they will bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the L rd … And also from them will I take Cohanim and Levites, the L rd said." And where did He say this? (Devarim 29:28) "What is concealed (from us [e.g., who is a Cohein and who, a Levite]) is known to the L rd our G d." Here, too, (Exodus 12:25) "And it shall be, when you come to the land that the L rd will give you, as He has spoken, etc." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 6:8) "And I shall bring you to the land, etc." (Exodus 12:26) "And it shall be, when your sons say to you, etc.": At that time, Israel was receiving bad tidings, that the Torah was destined to be forgotten. Others say they were receiving good tidings, that they were destined to see sons and sons of sons. (Exodus 12:27) "And the people bowed down and prostrated themselves": Why did they bow down? For it is written (Ibid. 13:18) "And the children of Israel went out of Egypt chamushim" — one out of five ("chamishah"). Others say one out of fifty ("chamishim"). And others say one out of five hundred ("chamesh me'oth"). R. Nehorai says; Upon my oath, not one in five hundred went out. For it is written (Ezekiel 16:7) "Numerous as the spouts of the field did I make you" (in Egypt), and (Exodus 1:7) "And the children of Israel were fruitful, and teemed" — One woman would bear six in one womb. And you say one in five hundred went out? And when did they die? In the three days of darkness, of which it is written (Exodus 10:23) "One man could not see another." The Jews buried their dead, and they were thankful and praised (the L rd) that their foes could not see (the dead) and rejoice in their downfall. (Ibid. 12:27) "Then you shall say that it is a Paschal sacrifice to the L rd.": R. Yossi Haglili said: The Jews would have deserved to die in Egypt (if not for the merit of the Paschal sacrifice) whereby the last of them consummated his sacrifice (and lived.) "Then you shall say that it is a Paschal sacrifice." We are hereby apprised that all who hear of or see the miracles that the Holy One Blessed be He wrought in Egypt must give praise. And thus is it written (Exodus 18:8-9) "And Moses related to his father-in-law all that the L rd did to Pharaoh and to Egypt. And Yithro rejoiced, etc." (Ibid. 28) "And the children of Israel went and they did": Reward is given for both the going and the doing. "and they did": Now did they already do? __ Their taking it upon themselves to do is regarded as their doing. "as the L rd commanded": We are hereby apprised of their eminence. Exactly as Moses and Aaron commanded them thus did they do. What is the intent of (the seemingly superfluous) "Thus did they do"? Moses and Aaron, too, did thus.

It is written (in Ps. 62:10 [9]): HUMANS ARE MERE VANITY. R Hiyya⁶⁵Since the authority generally cited as R. Hiyya lived sometime before R. Levi, the R. Hiyya cited here could not be he. This Hiyya may well be R. Hiyya the father of R. Berekhiah the Priest. said in the name of R. Levi: All vanities which Israel does all the days of the year are (ibid., cont.:) TO GO UP (i.e., vanish) ON THE SCALES (mozenayim). The Holy One pardons them in the constellation Libra (mozenayim), in the month of Tishri, as stated (in Lev. 16:30): FOR ON THIS DAY ATONEMENT SHALL BE MADE FOR YOU <TO CLEANSE YOU>….

...Another explanation. 'The LORD is my light and my help...' My light by the sea, as it says "...and it lit up the night..." (Exodus 14:20) And my help by the sea, as it says "...Stand by, and witness the deliverance which the LORD will work for you..." (ibid. v. 13) Whom should I fear? "But Moses said to the people, “Have no fear!" (ibid.) The LORD is the stronghold of my life, "The LORD is my strength and might..." (Exodus 15:2) Whom should I dread? "Terror and dread descend upon them..." (ibid. v. 16) When evil men assail me, "As Pharaoh drew near..." (Exodus 14:10) To devour my flesh, "...My desire shall have its fill of them..." (Exodus 15:9) R' Shmuel bar Nachmani said: the wicked do not leave this world until they announce their own verdict upon themselves. This is what is written "I will pursue, I will overtake" (ibid.) It does not then say 'we will divide' but rather "I will divide the spoil" (ibid.) I will be divided. It is they, my foes and my enemies, who stumble and fall, "Who hurled Pharaoh and his army into the Sea of Reeds..." (Psalms 136:15) From here forward Israel said 'Should an army besiege me...' meaning the army of Egypt, '...my heart would have no fear.' 'should war beset me, because of this would I be confident.' 'This' always refers to Torah, as it says "This is the Teaching..." (Deuteronomy 4:44) The rabbis explained this verse as referring to Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur. 'my light,' on Rosh Hashanah. 'And my help ,' on Yom Kippur. 'When evil men assail me,' this refers to the idolaters. 'To devour my flesh,' when they come to accuse Israel and say before the Holy One: these (meaning themselves) are idolaters and those (meaning Israel) are idolaters as well! 'my foes and my enemies,' the numerical value of the letters of hasatan (the accuser) is 364. Every day of the year he has the authority to make accusations, except on Yom Kippur (and Rosh Hashanah). For this reason Israel said 'Should an army besiege me,' meaning the idolatrous nations, 'my heart would have no fear.' 'Should war beset me, because of this would I be confident,' R' Levi said: because of the bequest which you wrote in the Torah "Thus only shall Aaron enter the Shrine..." (Vayikra 16:3)

Rabban Gamaliel said: Abraham sent and called for Shem, the son of Noah, and he circumcised the flesh of the foreskin of our father Abraham, and the flesh of the foreskin of Ishmael his son, as it is said, "In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son" (Gen. 17:26). "In the selfsame day" (means) in the might of the sun at midday. Not only that, but (it indicates) the tenth day of the month, the Day of Atonement. It is written in connection with the Day of Atonement, "Ye shall do no manner of work on that selfsame day, for it is a day of atonement" (Lev. 23:28); and in the present instance the text says, "In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised" (Gen. 17:26). Know then that on the Day of Atonement Abraham our father was circumcised. Every year the Holy One, blessed be He, sees the blood of our father Abraham's circumcision, and He forgives all the sins of Israel, as it is said, "For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you" (Lev. 16:30). In that place where Abraham was circumcised and his blood remained, there the altar was built, and therefore, "And all the blood thereof shall he pour out at the base of the altar" (Lev. 4:30). (It says also), "I said unto thee, In thy blood, live; yea, I said unto thee, In thy blood, live" (Ezek. 16:6).

Hew these two tablets of stone (Exod. 34:1). When did Moses descend from the mountain? R. Judah the son of Shalum said: Moses remained on the mountain with the Holy One, blessed be He, for one hundred and twenty days. How did he arrive at this conclusion? From the verse In the third month after the children of Israel were gone out of the land of Egypt (Exod. 19:1). On the sixth day of that month He gave him the Ten Commandments, as it is written concerning him: And Moses went up into the mountain of God (ibid. 24:13). He remained there for forty days, that is, the twenty-four days of the month of Sivan and the sixteen days of the month of Tammuz—totaling forty days in all. He descended from the mountain on the seventeenth day of Tammuz, and on the eighteenth day and nineteenth day he saw the calf, broke the tablets, and halted their revelry. On the twentieth day he turned and ascended once again, as is said: And it came to pass on the morrow that Moses said unto the people: “Ye have sinned a great sin; and now I will go up unto the Lord” (ibid. 32:30). And it is written: And Moses returned unto the Lord and said: “Oh, this people have sinned a great sin” (ibid, v. 31). He remained there the ten days of the month of Tammuz and the entire month of Av, totaling another forty days. He went up on the first day of the month of Elul when He told him: Hew thee these two tablets … and be ready by the morning (ibid. 34:1–2). And he hewed … and Moses rose up early in the morning, and went up unto Mount Sinai (ibid., v. 4). He stayed there throughout the month of Elul and until the tenth day of Tishri (another ten days). On the tenth day of Tishri he descended while the Israelites were praying and fasting. On that day He said to him: I have pardoned according to thy word (Num. 14:20). Then the Holy One, blessed be He, established that day as the day of forgiveness and pardon for the future generations (Yom Kippur), as it is said: For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you (Lev. 16:30). Thereupon He commanded Moses: Let them make Me a Sanctuary (Exod. 25:8).

The Son of Bethera said: Moses spent forty days on the mount, expounding the meaning of the words of the Torah, and examining its letters. After forty days he took the Torah, and descended on the tenth of the month, on the Day of Atonement, and gave it as an everlasting inheritance to the children of Israel, as it is said, "And this shall be unto you an everlasting statute" (Lev. 16:34).

Rabbi Zechariah said: They read in the Torah and found written therein, "And ye shall afflict your souls" (Lev. 16:29), and on the Day of Atonement they caused a Shophar to be sounded throughout all the camp and proclaimed a fast for all Israel, old and young. Were it not for the Day of Atonement the world could not stand, because the Day of Atonement is in this world and in the world to come, || as it is said, "It is a sabbath of sabbaths unto you" (Lev. 16:31). "A sabbath" refers to this world, "sabbaths" refers to the world to come. Moreover, if all the festivals pass away, the Day of Atonement will not pass away, for the Day of Atonement effects reconciliation for serious offences as well as for slight offences. Whence do we know that the Day of Atonement effects reconciliation? Because it is said, "For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall ye be clean" (Lev. 16:30). "From your sins" is not written here, but "from all your sins shall ye be clean before the Lord" (ibid.).

Rabbi Zechariah said: They read in the Torah and found written therein, "And ye shall afflict your souls" (Lev. 16:29), and on the Day of Atonement they caused a Shophar to be sounded throughout all the camp and proclaimed a fast for all Israel, old and young. Were it not for the Day of Atonement the world could not stand, because the Day of Atonement is in this world and in the world to come, || as it is said, "It is a sabbath of sabbaths unto you" (Lev. 16:31). "A sabbath" refers to this world, "sabbaths" refers to the world to come. Moreover, if all the festivals pass away, the Day of Atonement will not pass away, for the Day of Atonement effects reconciliation for serious offences as well as for slight offences. Whence do we know that the Day of Atonement effects reconciliation? Because it is said, "For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall ye be clean" (Lev. 16:30). "From your sins" is not written here, but "from all your sins shall ye be clean before the Lord" (ibid.).

Rabbi Zechariah said: They read in the Torah and found written therein, "And ye shall afflict your souls" (Lev. 16:29), and on the Day of Atonement they caused a Shophar to be sounded throughout all the camp and proclaimed a fast for all Israel, old and young. Were it not for the Day of Atonement the world could not stand, because the Day of Atonement is in this world and in the world to come, || as it is said, "It is a sabbath of sabbaths unto you" (Lev. 16:31). "A sabbath" refers to this world, "sabbaths" refers to the world to come. Moreover, if all the festivals pass away, the Day of Atonement will not pass away, for the Day of Atonement effects reconciliation for serious offences as well as for slight offences. Whence do we know that the Day of Atonement effects reconciliation? Because it is said, "For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall ye be clean" (Lev. 16:30). "From your sins" is not written here, but "from all your sins shall ye be clean before the Lord" (ibid.).

Sammael said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of all the universe ! Thou hast given me power over all the nations of the world, but over Israel Thou hast not given me power. He answered him, saying: Behold, thou hast power over them on the Day of Atonement if they have any sin, but if not, thou hast no power over them. Therefore they gave him a present on the Day of Atonement, in order that they should not bring their offering, as it is said, "One lot for the Lord, and the other lot for Azazel" (Lev. 16:8).

The lot for the Holy One, blessed be He, was the offering of a burnt offering, and the lot for Azazel was the goat as a sin offering, for all the iniquities of Israel were upon it, as it is said, "And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities" (Lev. 16:22). Sammael saw that sin was not to be found among them on the Day of Atonement. He said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of all the universe ! Thou hast one people like the ministering angels who are in heaven. Just as the ministering angels || have bare feet, so have the Israelites bare feet on the Day of Atonement. Just as the ministering angels have neither food nor drink, so the Israelites have neither food nor drink on the Day of Atonement. Just as the ministering angels have no joints, in like wise the Israelites stand upon their feet. Just as the ministering angels have peace obtaining amongst them, so the Israelites have peace obtaining amongst them on the Day of Atonement. Just as the ministering angels are innocent of all sin on the Day of Atonement, so are the Israelites innocent of all sin on the Day of Atonement. The Holy One, blessed be He, hears the prayers of Israel rather than (the charges brought by) their accuser, and He makes atonement for the altar, and for the sanctuary, and for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation both great and small, as it is said, "And he shall make atonement for the holy place" (Lev. 16:16).

The lot for the Holy One, blessed be He, was the offering of a burnt offering, and the lot for Azazel was the goat as a sin offering, for all the iniquities of Israel were upon it, as it is said, "And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities" (Lev. 16:22). Sammael saw that sin was not to be found among them on the Day of Atonement. He said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Sovereign of all the universe ! Thou hast one people like the ministering angels who are in heaven. Just as the ministering angels || have bare feet, so have the Israelites bare feet on the Day of Atonement. Just as the ministering angels have neither food nor drink, so the Israelites have neither food nor drink on the Day of Atonement. Just as the ministering angels have no joints, in like wise the Israelites stand upon their feet. Just as the ministering angels have peace obtaining amongst them, so the Israelites have peace obtaining amongst them on the Day of Atonement. Just as the ministering angels are innocent of all sin on the Day of Atonement, so are the Israelites innocent of all sin on the Day of Atonement. The Holy One, blessed be He, hears the prayers of Israel rather than (the charges brought by) their accuser, and He makes atonement for the altar, and for the sanctuary, and for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation both great and small, as it is said, "And he shall make atonement for the holy place" (Lev. 16:16).

Another interpretation (of 22:11): BUT < THE ANGEL OF THE LORD > CALLED UNTO HIM. Abraham said to him: Who are you? He said to him: I am an angel. Abraham said to him: When the Holy One told me to sacrifice him, he told me so himself. So now I ask that he himself tell me < to stop >. Immediately the Holy One, having opened the firmament and the lower sky, said to him (in Gen. 22:16): I BY MYSELF HAVE SWORN. Abraham said to him: So now you have sworn! But I also have sworn that I am not coming down from this altar until I say everything that I must. He said to him: Say everything that you must. Abraham said to him: Did you not tell me that what you would raise up from me would completely fill up the world, as stated (in Gen. 15:5): AND COUNT THE STARS … SO SHALL YOUR SEED BE? The Holy One said to him: Yes. He said to him: From whom? He said to him: From Isaac. He said to him: And did you not tell me that you would multiply my children like the dust, as stated (in Gen. 28:14): AND YOUR SEED SHALL BE LIKE THE DUST OF THE EARTH? The Holy One said to him: Yes. He said to him: From whom? He said to him: From Isaac. He said to him: Just as I had the right to talk back to you and did not say anything to you, O Sovereign of the World—Yesterday you said (in Gen. 21:12): FOR IN ISAAC SHALL SEED BE SUMMONED FOR YOU; but now you are saying (in Gen. 22:2): AND OFFER HIM THERE AS A BURNT OFFERING. Yet I suppressed my urge and did not talk back to you. < Just as I have acted in this way >, you also, when Isaac's children sin against you and enter into sorrow, remember on their behalf the binding of their father Isaac. Forgive them, and redeem them from their sorrows. The Holy One said to them: You have had your say; I will also have mine. The Holy One said to him: Your children are going to be sinful in my presence, < and I am going > to judge them on New Year's day. However, if they ask me to forgive them and blow a shofar before me on that day—Abraham said to him: And what is a shofar? The Holy One said to him: Do you not know? He said to him: Turn around and look. Immediately (as we read in Gen. 22:13): THEN ABRAHAM LIFTED HIS EYES [TO LOOK AND THERE WAS A RAM BEHIND HIM CAUGHT IN A THICKET ON HIS HORNS]. It says here nothing but ON HIS HORNS. He said to him: They will blow on a horn before me, and I will forgive their sins. In that hour he gave praise and thanksgiving to the Holy One; and that is how David gave praise¹⁷⁷Gk.: kalos. (in II Sam. 22:3 // Ps. 18:3 [2]): < THE LORD … MY SHIELD > AND MY HORN OF SALVATION. And it says also (in Joel 2:15): BLOW A SHOFAR IN ZION. The beginning (of the verse) concerns New Year's day. Then afterwards (ibid., cont.): SANCTIFY A FAST. This refers to the Day of Atonement, < which comes > after ten days, on which the Holy One forgives their sins. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 16:30): FOR ON THIS DAY ATONEMENT SHALL BE MADE FOR YOU…. Blessed are you, O Israel! How the Holy One has loved you! < He has done for you > what he has not done for any people or tongue, as stated (in Ps. 111:6): HE HAS DECLARED THE POWER OF HIS WORKS TO HIS PEOPLE < IN GIVING THEM THE HERITAGE OF THE NATIONS >. It is also written (in Ps. 147:19): HE DECLARES HIS WORDS TO JACOB, HIS STATUTES AND HIS ORDINANCES TO ISRAEL. And it is written (in vs. 20): HE HAS NOT DONE SO FOR ANY NATION; AND, AS FOR HIS ORDINANCES, THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN THEM. HALLELUJAH.

(Ibid. 25) "And the Cohein shall make atonement for the entire congregation of the children of Israel": Whence is it derived that if one of the tribes did not bring (its offering) atonement is withheld? From "And the Cohein shall make atonement for the entire congregation of the children of Israel." (Ibid.) "and it shall be forgiven them, for it was unwitting": I might understand (that they are forgiven) whether unwitting or witting; it is, therefore, written "for it was unwitting." From (24) "by the eyes of the congregation (i.e., beth-din) it were done in error," I would understand that the ruling of beth-din was in error and not willful; but as to the doing (i.e., the transgression) of the congregation, willful was equated with unwitting; it is, therefore, written "the children of Israel … for it was unwitting." If some were willful, I might think that it were considered (collectively) unwitting; it is, therefore, written "for the entire congregation of the children of Israel … for it was unwitting." (Ibid.) "and they have brought their offering": R. Meir says: If a tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of its beth-din, I might think they bring (the offerings); it is, therefore, written "and they (i.e., all of the tribes) have brought their offering." R. Yoshiyah says: If one tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of beth-din, whence is it derived that the other tribes bring (the offerings) because of it? From "and they (connoting all of the tribes) have brought their offering, a fire-offering to the L-rd." For R. Yoshiyah says: A tribe that transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of beth-din is liable, and the other tribes are exempt. If a tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of the great beth-din (i.e., the Sanhedrin), then that tribe brings a bullock, and the other tribes bring because of it. And what do they bring because of it? Twelve bullocks. R. Shimon b. Yochai says: If a tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of beth-din, it is exempt. If it transgressed according to the ruling of the great beth-din, they bring two bullocks: one for the tribe and one for the beth-din. When is this so? With other mitzvoth; but with idolatry, they bring two bullocks and two he-goats: one bullock for a burnt-offering and a he-goat for a sin-offering for that tribe, and the same for the beth-din. The majority of the congregation is reckoned as all of the congregation. "and they have brought their offering: a fire-offering to the L-rd": this is the burnt-offering; "and their sin-offering": this is the sin-offering for idolatry; "their error": this is the bullock of "concealment" of the congregation (viz. Vayikra 4:13-14). "their sin-offering … for their error": their sin-offering (i.e., the he-goats [offered] for idolatry) is like their error" the bullock of "concealment" of the congregation, in all of the procedures (of the offering). (Bamidbar, Ibid. 26) "And it shall be forgiven to the entire congregation of the sons of Israel": This tells me only of the men. Whence do I derive (the same for) the women? From "the entire congregation of the children of Israel." "and to the stranger who sojourns in their midst": Because this section is addressed to the Israelites (viz. 15:12), proselytes had to be (specifically) included. (Ibid.) "for to all the people it was in error": to exclude the high-priest, (who offers a she-goat, as an individual (viz. Ibid. 27). For it would follow (otherwise), viz.: Since the congregation bring a bullock for (transgression of) all the mitzvoth, and the high-priest brings a bullock for all the mitzvoth, then if I have learned about the congregation that just as they bring a bullock for all of the mitzvoth, so, they bring it for idolatry, then the high-priest, (too,) just as he brings a bullock for all the mitzvoth should bring a bullock for idolatry. And, furthermore, it follows a fortiori, viz.: If (in the Yom Kippur service) where the congregation does not bring a bullock, the high-priest brings a bullock (viz. Vayikra 16:3), here, (in respect to idolatry) where the congregation brings a bullock, how much more so should the high-priest bring a bullock! It is, therefore, written "for to all the people it was in error" — to exclude the high-priest.

(Bamidbar 19:1-2) "And the L-rd spoke to Aaron and to Moses saying: This is the statute of the Torah, which the L-rd has commanded, saying: Speak to the children of Israel and let them take unto you a red heifer, complete, which does not have a blemish, upon which a yoke has not come." There are sections (of the Torah), which are general in the beginning and particular at the end, and (others), which are particular in the beginning and general at the end: (Shemot 19:3) "Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob and declare to the children of Israel" — particular; (Ibid. 6) "These are the things, etc." — general. (Ibid. 12:43) "This is the statute of the Pesach" — general; (Ibid.) "Every stranger shall not eat of it" — particular. (Bamidbar 19:2) "This is the statute of the Torah" — general; (Ibid.) "and let them take for you a red heifer, complete" — particular. General-Particular. (The rule is:) There exists in the general only what is found in the particular. R. Eliezer says: It is written here "statute" and (relative to the Yom Kippur service, Vayikra 16:34) "statute." Just as there, (the Cohein ministers) in the white vestments; here, too, in the white vestments. R. Yochanan b. Zakkai was asked by his disciples: In which vestments was the red heifer processed? He: In the golden vestments. They: But did our master not teach us (that it was processed) in the white vestments? He: If I have forgotten what my eyes have seen and what my hands have ministered, how much more so, what I have taught! And why all this? To strengthen the disciples (in application to their learning). Others say: It was Hillel the Elder, but (not being a Cohein), he could not have said "what my hands have ministered." "and let them take": from the Temple treasury. "unto you": that you be appointed over it. And just as Moses was appointed over it, so, was Aaron. Similarly, in respect to the oil for lighting, (Shemot 21:20) "and let them take unto you" — that you be appointed over it. "a red heifer (parah)": R. Eliezer says: "eglah" signifies of the first year; "parah" signifies of the second year. The sages say: "eglah" — of the second year; "parah" — of the third or fourth year. R. Meir says: One of the fifth year, too, is valid. An old one is valid, but it is not waited for lest it sprout black hairs and become unfit. "parah": I understand black or white; it is, therefore, written "red." "whole": in redness or in (absence of) blemishes? "which does not have a blemish" accounts for blemishes. How, then, am I to understand "whole"? That it be "whole" in redness. "which does not have a blemish": Why need this be stated? Even if it were not stated, I would know it a fortiori, viz.: If offerings, which are not invalidated by work (having been done with them), are invalidated by a blemish, then the heifer, which is invalidated by work, how much more so should it be invalidated by a blemish! — No, this may be true of offerings, which must be processed (by the Cohein) in a state of cleanliness, wherefore a blemish invalidates them, as opposed to the heifer, which may be processed in a state of tumah (i.e., when the Cohein is a tvul yom), wherefore a blemish would not invalidate it. (So that the verse is needed to tell us otherwise.) — (No,) this is refuted by (the instance of) the Paschal lamb, which though it may be processed in a state of tumah, a blemish invalidates it, and this would indicate of the heifer that even though it is processed in tumah, a blemish invalidates it. (Why, then, is a verse needed to tell us this?) — No, this may be true of the Paschal lamb, which must be sacrificed at a fixed time, wherefore it is invalidated by a blemish, as opposed to the heifer, which, not having a fixed time (for its processing), should not be invalidated by a blemish. It must, therefore, (to tell us otherwise) be written "which does not have a blemish." Issi b. Akiva says: "which does not have a blemish": Why need this be stated? Even if it were not stated, I would know it a fortiori, viz.: If offerings, which are not invalidated by black or white (hairs), are invalidated by a blemish, then the heifer, which is invalidated by black or white, how much more so should it be invalidated by a blemish"! If I know this a fortiori, why need it be stated "which does not have a blemish"? To exclude (from invalidation by a blemish) the heifer of the broken neck (eglah arufah [viz. Devarim 21:4]). For it would follow (if not for this verse) that blemishes should invalidate the eglah arufah, viz.: If offerings, which are not invalidated by work, are invalidated by a blemish, then eglah arufah, which is invalidated by work, how much more so should it be invalidated by a blemish! It is, therefore, written (in respect to the red heifer), "which does not have a blemish" — It (the red heifer) is invalidated by a blemish, but the eglah arufah is not invalidated by a blemish. R. Yehudah b. Betheira says: If the sin-offering of a bird, whose offerers must be tahor, is not invalidated by a blemish, then the red heifer, whose processors may be tamei (tvul yom), how much more so should it not be invalidated by a blemish! (The verse, then, is needed to tell us that it is invalidated by a blemish.) — No, this may be true of the sin-offering of a bird, which is valid if either male or female, as opposed to a heifer, (where only a female is valid.) Why, then, need it be stated "which does not have a blemish"? (lit., "when there is no blemish in it") When the blemish is in it (it is invalid), but when it has passed, it is valid. R. Yoshiyah Numithi asked before R. Yehudah b. Betheira: What is a blemish which has passed, in which instance it is valid? And he showed me between his two fingers — when(flesh) protrudes or when it has two tails. "upon which a yoke has not come": Scripture speaks of a yoke not in (the time of its) working. And if you would say, a yoke in (the time of its working), would you say that? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, is invalidated by a yoke (in its time of working), then the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should it be invalidated by a yoke (in the time of its working!) — (No,) this is refuted by the offerings, which are invalidated by a blemish, but not by a yoke (in the time of working), and they would indicate about the red heifer that even though it is invalidated by a blemish, it should not be invalidated by a yoke (in the time of its working). — No, this may be true of offerings, which are not invalidated by black and white hairs, wherefore a yoke does not invalidate them, as opposed to the red heifer, which is invalidated by black and white, wherefore a yoke (in the time of its working) should invalidate them. What, then, is the intent of "upon which a yoke has not come"? A yoke not in the time of its working. Whence is it derived that other labors are equated with a yoke (to invalidate the red heifer)? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If (in the instance of) eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, other labors are equated with a yoke, (viz. Devarim 21:3 "which has never been worked, which has never pulled under a yoke"), then (in the instance of) the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should other labors be equated with a yoke! — But perhaps it should be transposed, viz.: If (in the instance of) the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, other labors were not equated with a yoke, then (in the instance of) eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should other labors not be equated with a yoke! It is, therefore, written "which has never been worked." I have reasoned a fortiori and I have transposed. The transposition has been refuted and I have emerged with the original a fortiori argument, viz.: If (in the instance of) the eglah arufah, which is not invalidated by a blemish, other labors are equated with a yoke, then (in the instance of) the red heifer, which is invalidated by a blemish, how much more so should other labors be equated with a yoke!

(Bamidbar 19:5) "And he shall burn the heifer before his eyes": Scripture apprises us about the heifer that preoccupation with some other) work invalidates its burning. — But even without this being stated, I know it a fortiori, viz.: If it (preoccupation) invalidates its slaughtering (see above), should it not invalidate its burning! If I know this a fortiori, what need is there for a verse? Rather, Scripture apprises us that (preoccupation with some other) work invalidates it from the time of slaughtering until it becomes ashes. "And he shall burn the heifer before his eyes, and not the bullocks (that of Yom Kippur, etc.) that are burnt ("outside the camp"). For it would follow (otherwise), viz.: If with the red heifer, which is not processed within (the sanctuary), work invalidates its burning, then the bullocks, which are processed within, how much more so should work invalidate their burning! — No, this may be true of the red heifer, whose slaughtering is invalidated by work, wherefore it invalidates its burning, as opposed to the bullocks that are burnt, whose slaughtering is not invalidated by work, wherefore it should not invalidate their burning! — But let it (i.e., work) invalidate their slaughtering! And this would, indeed, follow, viz.: If bullocks, which are not processed within, work invalidates their slaughtering, then the bullocks that are burnt, which are processed within, how much more so should work invalidate their slaughtering! It is, therefore, written "then he shall burn the heifer (before his eyes") and (Ibid. 3) "and he shall slaughter it before him," and not the bullocks that are burned. "And he shall burn the heifer before his (Elazar's) eyes": Another burns and Elazar looks on. "Its skin, and its flesh, and its blood together with its dung": Just as the dung (remains) in its place, (i.e., it is not removed from the bowels,) so, all (of the others remain) in their place — whence they ruled: Any blood (remaining in his hand) should be returned to its place (i.e., the shechitah site), and if it is not returned, the heifer is invalidated. What does he do? He wipes his hand on the body of the heifer. "And he shall burn the heifer": to include bits (leaping from the fire) — whence they ruled: Any amount of flesh must be returned (to the fire); if he does not return it, it (the heifer) is invalidated. Any amount of bone must be returned; if he does not return it, it is not invalidated, ("bone" not being mentioned in the verse). If an olive-size (leapt out of the fire), he must return it (to the fire). (And if he returned it, even if a minute amount remained behind, he must return it.) If he does not return it, (the heifer) is invalidated. "he shall burn": (We have here an instance of) amplification ("he shall burn") after amplification ("And he shall burn") in which instance the rule is "diminution" — If most of it (and not necessarily all of it) has been consumed, (it is valid). These are the words of R. Yishmael. R. Yehudah says: (The intent of "he shall burn" is that) he shall not diminish the wood (supply). He adds to it bundles of hyssop and bundles of Grecian hyssop in order to increase the (amount of) ashes. (Ibid. 6) "And the Cohein shall take cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet": It is written here "taking," and, elsewhere, (Ibid. 18) "taking." Just as "taking" here is three (species), so, "taking" there, (although only "hyssop" is mentioned there.) "wood": This implies any kind of wood. It is, therefore, written "cedar": This (alone) implies even a branch. It is, therefore, written "wood." How so? A chip of cedar wood. "hyssop": Not "Grecian" or "Kochalith" or "Desert" or "Roman" (hyssop) or any other hyssop which has an epithet. "ushni tola'ath": i.e., whose variant ("shniyatho" [something called by a "variant" name]) is tola'ath (scarlet). "and he shall cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer": I might think (that he casts it in) when the heifer has already been reduced to ashes; it is, therefore, written "the heifer" (i.e., when it is still recognizable as a heifer.) If "the heifer," I might think (that he casts it in) even when it has not been burned. It is, therefore, written "into the midst of the burning." How is this to be reconciled? (He casts it in) when the flames have caught on to most of it. R. Akiva says: "the burning": I might think (that he casts it in) when the heifer has already been reduced to ashes; it is, therefore, written "the heifer." If "the heifer," I might think if he splits it open and places it into its midst; it is, therefore, written "and he shall cast it into the burning of the heifer." How is this to be reconciled? (He casts it in) when it has split open (of itself because of the fire.) "And the Cohein shall wash his garments, and he shall bathe his flesh in water": Scripture hereby apprises us of the caster of the hyssop that he imparts tumah to garments. "and then he shall come to the encampment": Just as here, he (the caster of the hyssop) is forbidden to come to the encampment (before he cleanses himself), so, there, he (the burner and the gatherer of the ashes) is forbidden to come to the encampment. "and the Cohein shall be unclean until the evening": Just as here (he is unclean) until the evening, so, there, he (the burner of the bullock and the he-goat of Yom Kippur, [viz. Vayikra 16:26]), (he is unclean) until the evening. (Ibid. 8) "And he who burns it shall wash his garments": Scripture hereby apprises us of the burner of the heifer that he imparts tumah to garments. Even without the verse, I can derive it a fortiori, viz.: If the caster of the hyssop imparts tumah to his garments, how much more so the burner of the heifer! Why, then, do I need the verse? Scripture hereby apprises us of those who occupy themselves with the heifer from beginning to end that they require the washing of garments and bathing of the body and the going down of the sun (to be cleansed). "And he who burns it shall wash his garments": and not plague-garments (i.e., the garments of the one who burns the clothes of the leper or of one afflicted with plague do not become unclean.) For it would follow otherwise, viz.: If the heifer, which does not impart tumah by contact, its burning imparts tumah to garments, then plague-garments, which do impart tumah by contact, how much more so should their burner impart tumah to garments! It is, therefore, written "And he who burns it shall wash his garments," and not plague-garments. "he shall wash his garments with water and he shall bathe his flesh in water": "in water" — twice. What is the intent of this? For it would follow: Since a man requires immersion and vessels require immersion, then just as a man immerses in (an amount of water) that is sufficient for him, i.e., forty sa'ah), so vessels are immersed in a (smaller amount of water) sufficient for them. It is, therefore, written "in water" twice. Where man is immersed (i.e., forty sa'ah), there hands (for ritual purposes) and vessels are immersed. (Ibid. 9) "And a man who is clean shall gather the ashes": Because we find that all of the processing of the heifer is by a Cohein, I might think that the gathering of the ashes, too, is by a Cohein; it is, therefore, written "And a man who is clean" — whence we are apprised that the gathering of the ashes is kasher through any man. "And a man who is clean" — to exclude a minor. ("a man" then) implies that both a minor and a woman are excluded; it is, therefore, written "who is clean" — to include (as kasher) a woman. These are the words of R. Yishmael. R. Akiva says: "And a man who is clean" — to include a zar (a non-Cohein). "clean" — to validate a woman. ("clean" then) implies that both a woman and a minor are included; it is, therefore, written (Ibid.) "and he shall place it outside the encampment": Scripture speaks only of someone who has the "mind" to "place" (with intent, excluding a minor, who does not have the mind to do so.) "a man who is clean": clean vis-à-vis ma'aser, and tamei vis-à-vis terumah. And elsewhere (Ibid. 18) it is written "And a clean man shall take hyssop and dip it in the water." R. Akiva asks: Why is this ("clean man") written? Even if it were not written, I would know it a fortiori, viz.: If the gatherer (of the ashes) must be clean, how much more so the sprinkler! What, then, is the intent of "a clean man"? One who has left the category of "tumah." And who is that? One who immersed in the daytime (and whose cleanliness is consummated in the evening). And it is written elsewhere (Ibid. 19) "clean." Just as there, tamei for terumah and "clean" for ma'aser, so "clean" here (Ibid. 9), tamei for terumah and clean for ma'aser. "the ashes of the heifer": and not the brands — whence they ruled: A brand which has ash is crushed and one which does not have ash is discarded. A bone, in any event, will be crushed. "outside the encampment": in the Mount of Olives — whence they ruled: It is divided into three parts: one for the chel (a place within the fortification of the Temple); one for the Mount of Olives; one to be divided among all the priestly watches. "in a clean place": its surroundings must be clean — whence R. Elazar Hakapper said: A vessel containing the cleansing (ashes of the red heifer), with an air-tight lid in the tent of a dead man is tamei, it being written "in a clean place." And this is not a clean place. "And it shall be for the congregation of the children of Israel in keeping for waters of sprinkling." What is the intent of this? I might think that "work" (see above) is invalidated only vis-à-vis the heifer. Whence do I derive (the same for) the water (that is added to the ashes)? From "And it shall be … in keeping for waters of sprinkling" (which implies that "work" is to be abstained from only when they are being made waters of sprinkling.) — But perhaps (the stricture against "work" obtains even after they have been sanctified as waters of sprinkling. — It is, therefore, written "for (i.e., to make them) waters of sprinkling." And they are already waters of sprinkling. If a cow drank of the cleansing waters, its flesh is tamei (if it drank) within twenty-four hours (of being slaughtered). R. Yehudah says it (the water) is nullified in its intestines, it being written "And it shall be for the congregation of the children of Israel in keeping" (i.e., once it is no longer "in keeping," it does not confer tumah upon what comes in contact with it.) This question ("tahor or tamei"?) was asked before thirty-two elders and they ruled its flesh "tahor." This is one of the things that R. Yossi Haglili discussed with R. Akiva, (R. Yossi holding "tahor," and R. Akiva, "tamei"), and R. Akiva dismissed him, (R. Yossi being unable to substantiate his view.) Afterwards, R. Yossi found substantiation for his view, and asked R. Akiva: May I return? R. Akiva: Shall I allow everyone to return, and not you because your name is "Yossi Haglili"? R. Yossi (presenting his substantiation): It is written "And it shall be for the congregation of the children of Israel in keeping." It is only when they are "in keeping" that they are considered sprinkling waters (and confer tumah [see above].) R. Tarfon said (on Daniel 8:4) "I saw the ram butting westward, northward, and southward. And no beast could withstand him, and there was none to deliver from his power. He did as he willed and grew great." This ("the ram") is R. Akiva. (Ibid. 5) "As I looked on, a he-goat came from the west, passing over the entire earth without touching the ground. And the goat had a beetling horn between its eyes": This is R. Yossi Haglili and his response. (6) "And he came up to the two-horned ram that I saw standing before the water course, and he charged at him full force. (7) And I saw him reach the ram and rage at him, and he struck the ram and broke his two horns" — R. Akiva and Shimon b. Naness — "and the ram" — R. Akiva — "was powerless to withstand him. And he" — R. Yossi Haglili — "cast him to the ground and trampled him. And there were none" — the thirty-two elders — "to rescue him from his hand."

(Bamidbar 35:34) "in whose midst I dwell": Beloved are Israel, for even when they are tamei the Shechinah reposes among them — (Vayikra 16:16) "who dwells with them in the midst of their uncleanliness," and (Ibid. 15:31) "… when they defile My sanctuary which is in their midst," and (Bamidbar 5:3) "and they shall not make unclean their camps in whose midst I dwell." (Ibid. 35:34) "for I the L-rd dwell in the midst of the children of Israel." R. Nathan says: Beloved are Israel, for wherever they are exiled the Shechinah is with them. They were exiled to Egypt — the Shechinah was with them, viz. (I Samuel 2:27) "Did I not reveal Myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt (enslaved to) the house of Pharaoh?" They were exiled to Bavel — the Shechinah was with them, viz. (Isaiah 43:14) "Because of you I was sent to Bavel." They were sent to Eilam — the Shechinah was with them, viz. (Jeremiah 49:38) "I placed My throne in Eilam, and banished from there king and officers." They were exiled to Edom — the Shechinah was with them, viz. (Isaiah 63:1) "Who is This, who comes from Edom, with sullied vestments, from Batzrah?" And when they return, the Shechinah will be with them, viz. (Devarim 30:3) "Then the L-rd your G-d will return with your captivity and He will have mercy upon you." It is not written "and He will return to you," but "and He will return with you!" And it is written (Song of Songs 4:8) "With Me from the Levanon, My bride — with Me from the Levanon shall you come. You will look from the top of Amanah, from the top of Senir and Chermon, from the dens of lions, from the mountains of leopards." Rebbi says: An analogy: A king says to his servant: Why do you search for me? I am with my son. Whenever you need me, I am with my son. "For I, the L-rd dwell in the midst of the children of Israel."