ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafYoma 70
YOMA 59-88 have been dedicated to the memory of the late Dr. Simcha
Bekelnitzky (Simcha Gedalya ben Shraga Feibush) of Queens N.Y. by his wife
and daughters. Well known in the community for his Chesed and Tzedakah, he
will long be remembered.
(a) The Kohen Gadol needed to announce, before closing the Sefer-Torah,
that more than what he Leined was written in it - to reassure the people
that the Sefer was not missing the Parshah that he was about to Lein by
(b) He Leined "u've'Asor" by heart, rather than roll the Sefer-Torah from
Emor to Pinchas - because, due to Tircha de'Tzibura, it is forbidden to
roll the Sefer-Torah and let everybody wait.
(c) One reason that he does not bring another Sefer is so that people
should not think that the first Sefer was Pasul. Another reason is in order
to avoid an unnecessary Berachah (which he would have to recite if a second
Sefer was brought).
(d) On Rosh Chodesh, Shabbos Chanukah, we Lein from three Sefarim - without
being concerned that people might declare the first two Pasul - because
there, when *three* people are being called up to the Torah, it is natural
to take out three Sefarim; whereas on Yom Kipur, when it is only *one*
person, it is *not* natural to take out a second Sefer.
(a) After the three Berachos for the Mikdash, for the Kohanim and for
Yisrael, the Kohen Gadol concluded with a Berachah 'al Sha'ar Tefilah' - a
Hashem should save Yisrael who needed His salvation.
(b) After the Kohen Gadol had read the Parshiyos of Yom Kipur everyone
took out the Sefer-Torah that he had brought with him on Erev Yom Kipur
(See Agados Maharsha) and read in it - in order to show the beautiful
Sifrei Torah (to promote the Mitzvah of "Zeh Keili ve'Anveihu") - perhaps
because Yom Kipur is the day on which the Torah (i.e. the second Luchos)
(c) It was not possible to watch both the burning of the Par and the Sa'ir
and the Leining of the Kohen Gadol. Had it been, it *would* have been
permitted to do so. We would have otherwise thought that it would *not* -
because it is forbidden to pass by a Mitzvah.
(d) Someone who watched either of these two Avodos would be performing the
Mitzvah of 'be'Rov Am Hadras Melech' (increasing the glory of Hashem, by
joining the crowds who were watching the the Mitzvah being performed).
(a) If the Kohen Gadol chose to Lein in the Bigdei Lavan, he would change
his clothes into the Bigdei Zahav with the appropriate Tevilah and two
Kidushei Yadav ve'Raglav. He would then bring his ram and that of the
people (i.e. the Musaf) - according to both Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Akiva.
(b) According to Rebbi Eliezer, he also brought the seven lambs of the
Musaf then. According to Rebbi Akiva, he brought them together with the
(c) The Sa'ir ...
1. ... ha'Na'aseh ba'Chutz - was the Sa'ir of Musaf (whose blood was
brought on the Mizbe'ach ha'Olah).
(d) The Gemara is uncertain whether according to Rebbi Akiva, the Par
ha'Olah (of the Musaf) was brought with the Tamid shel *Shachar* or with
that of the shel *Bein ha'Arbayim*. The goat of the Chatas was definitely
brought together with the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim - after the fifth
2. ... ha'Na'aseh bi'Fenim - was the Sa'ir la'Hashem, whose blood was
brought inside the Heichal.
(a) After changing into the Bigdei Lavan (following the fourth Tevilah) -
the Kohen Gadol entered the Kodesh Kodashim to remove the Kaf and the
Machtah with the Ketores from between the poles of the Aron.
(b) After the *fifth* Tevilah, besides bringing the Tamid shel Bein
ha'Arbayim and whatever of the Musaf had still to be brought - the Kohen
Gadol entered the Heichal in order to bring the Ketores shel Bein
ha'Arbayim and to kindle the Menorah.
(c) Before changing back into his own clothes, the Kohen Gadol made a final
Kidush Yadayim ve'Raglayim.
(d) People would accompany him on his way home. When he arrived home, he
would make a banquet (a Se'udas Hoda'ah) because he emerged from the Kodesh
(Kodashim) in peace.
(a) The *goat* of the Chatas (of the Musaf) was definitely brought together
with the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim, the *bull* might well have been
brought together with the Tamid shel Shachar even according to Rebbi
Eliezer. The Emurin of the Par and the Sa'ir are salso in doubt - it is not
certain how close to the burning of their bodies they were burned.
(b) Rava resolves these doubts from two Beraisos, one like Rebbi Eliezer,
the other, like Rebbi Akiva: According to the *first* Beraisa, Rebbi
Eliezer holds that the Emurin of the Par and the Sa'ir of the Chatas were
brought together with the two rams after the third Tevilah. The remainder
of the animals of the Musaf i.e. the bull and the seven lambs of the Olah,
and the goat of the Chatas - were brought after the fifth Tevilah together
with the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim.
(a) According to the *second* Beraisa, Rebbi Akiva holds that the bulls and
the lambs of the Musaf were brought together with the Tamid shel Shachar.
He learns this from the Pasuk in Pinchas "Milevad Olas ha'Boker Asher
le'Olas ha'Tamid" - which teaches us that the Musafin were brought at the
same time as the Tamid shel Shachar.
(b) The Emurei Chatas (of the Par and the Sa'ir) according to him - were
brought after the two rams (after the third Tevilah).
(c) Rebbi Eliezer follows the order of the Pesukim - first all the Korbanos
mentioned in Vayikra: the Avodas ha'Yom, the two rams and the removal of
the Kaf and the Machtah, and then the Musafin and the Tamid shel Bein
ha'Arbayim mentioned in Bamidbar. "Milevad Olas ha'Boker ... " (from which
Rebbi Akiva learns that the Musaf was brought at the same time as the Tamid
shel Shachar, speaks about the rest of the year, but not about Yom Kipur,
since the Torah has indicated that the order is different there).
(d) Rebbi Eliezer learns from "Milevad Chatas ha'Kipurim - that whatever
the one is Mechaper for the other is Mechaper for; in other words, the
Sa'ir ha'Chitzon (of Rosh Chodesh) atones for Tum'as Mikdash of which one
was initially aware and then forgot - just like the Sa'ir ha'Penimi (of Yom
(a) According to Rebbi Yehudah in Rebbi Akiva, not *all* the lambs of the
Musafin were brought with the Korban Tamid, only *one* - the other six were
brought only after the Avodas ha'Yom.
(b) According to Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon in Rebbi Akiva - the opposite
was true: six of the lambs were brought with the Korban Tamid, and the
remaining one, after the Avodas ha'Yom.
(c) Both Tana'im based their opinions on the seemingly contradictory
Pesukim: "ve'Yatza, ve'Asah es Olaso *ve'es Olas ha'Am*" (referring to the
Musaf, and implying that they were brought *after* the Avodas ha'Yom), and
"Milevad Olas ha'Boker" (which implies that they were brought *before* it -
together with the Tamid shel Shachar.
1. According to Rebbi Yehudah, the Kohen Gadol brought only *one* of the
seven lambs *before* the Avodas ha'Yom - because were he to bring *six*
then, Chazan were afraid that, by the time he came to the all important
Avodas ha'Yom, he might be too weak to manage it.
2. According to Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon he brought only *one* of the
lambs *after* the Avodas ha'Yom - because they were afraid that if he was
left with a lot of animals to bring, he would be negligent and not bring
them. As for being too weak to perform the Avodas ha'Yom, this was
unlikely, since the Kohen Gadol would certainly exert himself to complete
(a) The Tana who holds that they brought only *one* ram - and that the ram
of the Olah of the people and the ram of the Olah of the Musaf are one and
the same, is Rebbi.
(b) Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Rebbi Shimon says that they were two different
(c) Rebbi derives his opinion from the word "Ayil *Echad*" which the Torah
inserts by the Musaf. Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon learns from the word
"Echad" - that the choicest lamb in the flock should be chosen.
(d) Rebbi learns that from the Pasuk in Re'ei "ve'Chol Mivchar Nidreichem".
Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon requires *two* Pesukim for that, one by an
obligatory Korban, and the other, by a voluntary one - because, on the one
hand, one may have thought a *voluntary* Korban should be from the best (in
order that it should be accepted with good-will (but not an obligatory one,
which has already been accepted); and on the other, one might have thought
that it is specifically an *obligatory* Korban that should be from the best
(in order to fulfill one's obligation in the best possible manner).