Talmud su Levitico 16:17

⁷⁷Babli 39b, Menaḥot109b; Tosephta Sotah 13:8.. The first sentence is quoted in the next Chapter, 6:3. Simeon the Just served Israel as High Priest for forty years, and in the last year he told them, in this year I am going to die. They asked him, from where do you know? He said to them, every year when I entered the Holiest of Holies, an old man dressed in white and his head wrapped in white entered with me and left with me. But this year he entered with me but did not leave with me. ⁷⁸Cf Chapter 1, Notes 220 ff. They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written⁷⁹Lev. 16:17., nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written⁸⁰Ez. 1:10., the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting? He answered them, who tells me that it was a person? I am saying that it was the Holy One, praise to Him⁸¹In the apparition known as Shekhina..

HALAKHAH: “Anything which is more frequent than another,” etc. [“If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull”,]²¹⁵From B; a necessary introduction to the following text. for one is atoning, the other is being atoned for²¹⁶This also is the reason given in the Babli (13a) for the precedence of a purification offering over a simultaneously presented elevation offering, both being most holy sacrifices.. It is preferable that the atoner precede the atoned for, as it is written, he shall atone for himself, and for his house, and for all the congregation of Israel²¹⁷Lev. 16:17. The argument really refers to the service of the Day of Atonement in its entirety, where the High Priest performs three acts of atonement, the first for himself and his family, the second for himself and the priests, and then the third for himself, the priests, and all of Israel. The priest performing the rite of atonement has to be purified himself before being able to serve others. (Tosephta Horaiot 2:4, Zevahim 10:1).. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence²¹⁸Again because the priest has to act to present the king’s gift.. Between a voluntary gift of the community and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the prince has precedence²¹⁹Since he is the representative of the community.. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, which one has precedence? Let us hear from the following: A voluntary gift of the Anointed and rams of idolatry²²⁰Cf. Chapter 1, Notes 122,135. For the number of rams, cf. Mishnah 1:6. were standing. The rams of idolatry have precedence since their blood enters inside²²¹While this is not indicated elsewhere, if the bull is identified as the bull prescribed in Lev. 4, the ram is attached to a sacrifice whose blood is brought inside the Sanctuary and which, therefore, has precedence as the more holy sacrifice.. He only said “since their blood enters inside;” this implies that between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. If there were standing the bull of idolatry, the ram which accompanies it, and another purification sacrifice. The bull precedes the ram²²²As will be explained later in this paragraph., the ram precedes the other purification sacrifice, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull²²³The bull of idolatry is defined as an elevation sacrifice which takes second place after a purification sacrifice (Note 216). The rules lead to an infinite loop.. How is this done? Rebbi Yose said, since the ram is dependent in time on the bull, it is as if the bull preceded it, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. The bull of idolatry precedes the ram because it precedes in Scripture²²⁴The bull is prescribed in the first half of Num. 15:24, the ram in the second half.. Rebbi Samuel the brother of Rebbi Berekhiah asked: But then that of the New Moon should precede the ram which comes with it because it precedes [in Scripture.²²⁵The sacrifices for the Day of the New Moon are prescribed in Num. 28:11 (elevation sacrifices) and 28:15 (the purification sacrifice). This contradicts our rule from Note 216.]²²⁶Added from B, not absolutely necessary. Rebbi Abba Mari said, you cannot do this; its purification sacrifice is defective²²⁷The argument is very elliptic. The ram of idolatry follows the bull not really because it is mentioned later in the verse, but mainly because it is spelled defective, not as חטאת but only as חטת (Babli 13a, Zevaḥim 90b). But the purification offering of the special days is directly connected with the daily offerings which start the day in the sanctuary (Num. 28:15.): After the permanent elevation offering it shall be made, with its libation; it made it lean on the permanent elevation offering. Between the sacrifice of a man and the sacrifice of a woman, the man’s sacrifice has precedence²²⁸If both are voluntary offerings of equal value. But an obligatory offering always has precedence over a voluntary one (Tosephta Zevaḥim 10:4).. That is, if both were equal. But if one was a bull and the other a lamb, it is what Rebbi Phineas said in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: A slave brings a bull and his master brings a bull, the slave’s precedes the master’s, as we have stated there: “If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull in all its ceremonies.²²⁹The argument is a non sequitur. Some commentators want to emend the text, in that the slave brings a bull but his master a goat. While this connects to the preceding, it severs the connection to the statement of R. Phineas. As a matter of principle, an emendation is totally inadmissible since the text is confirmed not only by the two independent sources here but also by Lev. Rabba 5(4) where the case of slave and master both bringing a bull follows a story about the merit of contributing to the support of scholars. As the text is presented here, one wonders why the following stories are placed here and what connection they could have with the topic of the Mishnah. But Lev. Rabba, an old text, shows that the case of slave and master is not a legal but a homiletic statement. There the argument is that the High Priest is the servant of the people; the Sanctuary is run only on behalf of the people. After the destruction of the Temple, the rabbinic establishment became the servant of the people, looking after their needs. Therefore, the rules of preference should be transferred from Temple service to the rabbinic establishment.”

They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written²²⁰.Lev. 16:17., nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written²²¹Ez. 1:10., the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting²²²If the offending priest was hit on his head by a calf’s foot it must have been by one of the four-headed angels seen by Ezechiel whose feet are calves’ feet (Ez.1:7)? He answered them, if he enters following normal rules