Previous Folio / Horayoth Directory / Tractate List / Navigate Site
Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Horayoth
Was, however, the anointing oil in existence [in the days of Jehoahaz]? Surely it was taught: At the time when the Holy Ark was hidden away there were also hidden the anointing oil, the jar of manna,1 Aaron's rod with its almonds and blossoms,2 and the coffer which the Philistines had sent to Israel as a gift and concerning which it is said, And put the jewels of gold, which ye returned Him for a guilt offering, in a coffer by the side thereof; and send it away that it may go.3 And who hid them? It was Josiah, King of Judah, who hid them; because, having observed that it was written in the Torah, The Lord will bring thee and thy king … [unto a nation that thou hast not known],4 he gave orders that they shall be hidden away, as it is said, And he said unto the Levites that taught all Israel, that were holy unto the Lord, 'Put the Holy Ark into the house which Solomon the son of David, King of Israel, did build; there shall no more be a burden upon your shoulders; now serve the Lord your God and his people Israel;'5 and R. Eleazar stated: The inference6 is arrived at by an analogy between the expressions. 'There' and 'there',7 'To he kept'8 and 'to he kept',9 and 'generations' and 'generations'!10 — R. Papa replied: [Jehoahaz was anointed] with pure balsam.
Our Rabbis taught: How were the kings anointed? — In the shape of a wreath. And the priests? — In the shape of a Chi. What is meant by 'the shape of a Chi'! — R. Menashya b. Gadda replied: In the shape of a Greek [G].
One [Tanna] reported that oil was poured upon his head first and afterwards some oil was applied between his eyelids, but another [Tanna] reported that first some oil was applied between his eyelids and afterwards oil was poured upon his head!11 — This is a matter of dispute between Tannaim. Some maintain that anointing takes precedence while others maintain that the pouring takes precedence. What reason is advanced by him who maintains that pouring takes precedence? — [The fact] that it is written. And he poured of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head and anointed him, to sanctify him.12 And what reason is offered by him who maintains that anointing takes precedence? — He holds this opinion because a similar procedure is found in connection with the vessels of ministry.13 But, surely, And he poured12 is written first, and only afterwards And he anointed!12 — The meaning intended is this: What is the reason why he poured? Because he had already anointed.
Our Rabbis taught: It is like the precious oil … coming down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard, etc.,14 two drops like pearls hung from Aaron's beard. R: Papa said: A Tanna taught that when he spoke15 they ascended and lodged at the root of his beard. And concerning this matter, Moses was anxious. He said, 'Have I, God forbid, made an improper use of the anointing oil?'16 A heavenly voice came forth and called out, Like the precious oil … like the dew of Hermon;17 as the law of improper use of holy objects is not applicable to the dew of Hermon, so also is it not applicable to the anointing oil on the beard of Aaron. Aaron however, was still anxious. He said, 'It is possible that Moses did not trespass, but I may have trespassed'. A heavenly voice came forth and said to him, Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity;18 as Moses is not guilty of trespass, so are you not guilty of trespass.
Our Rabbis taught: The kings are anointed only at a fountain that their sovereignty may endure, as it is said, And the king said unto them: 'Take with you the servants of your lord … and bring him down to Gihon'.19
R. Ammi said: He who wishes to ascertain whether he will live through the year or not shall, during the ten days between the New Year and the Day of Atonement, kindle a lamp in a house wherein there is no draught. If the light continues to burn he may know that he will live through the year. He who desires to engage in business and wishes to ascertain whether he will succeed or not, let him rear up a cock; if it grows plump and fine he will succeed. He who desires to set out on a journey and wishes to ascertain whether he will return home again or not. let him station himself in a dark house; if he sees the reflection of his shadow he may know that he will return home again. This, however, is not a proper thing to do, lest his courage fail him and he meet with misfortune in consequence.
R. Mesharsheya said to his sons: Whenever you intend coming in for your lesson with your master revise the subject first and then enter the presence of your master; and when you sit before him, look at his mouth, for it is written, But thine eyes shall see thy teacher.22 When you practice your lessons, practice them by a river of water so that as the waters advance continually, so may your acquired knowledge advance continually. Rather sit on the rubbish heap of Matha Mehasia23 than in the palaces of Pumbeditha. Rather eat an unsavory gildana24 of Matha Mehasia than the kuthha25 of the lofty mansions.26
My horn is exalted in the Lord;27 my horn is exalted but not my flask: The kingdoms of David and Solomon who were anointed with a 'horn'28 endured; the kingdoms of Saul and Jehu who were anointed with a 'flask'29 did not endure.
HE WHO WAS ANOINTED WITH THE ANOINTING OIL etc. Our Rabbis taught: 'Anointed' might imply a king, hence it was stated 'priest'. If only 'priest' had been stated one might have applied it to the High Priest who was dedicated by the additional garments only, hence it was stated, 'anointed'. If only 'anointed' had been written one might have applied it to the priest anointed for war,30 hence it was stated, and the anointed Priest31 above whom there is no other anointed [Priest]. How is this inferred? — As Raba said that 'the thigh'32 implies the right thigh, so here also 'the anointed' implies the most important of the anointed.
The Master said, 'Anointed might imply a king.' Does a king bring a sin offering of a bullock? Surely it is a he-goat that he brings!33 — It34 was necessary, since it might have been assumed that only for error in action does a king bring a sin offering of a he-goat but that for ignorance of the law he brings a bullock, hence it was necessary to teach us [that he never brings a bullock].
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A [HIGH PRIEST WHO IS] ANOINTED WITH THE ANOINTING OIL etc. Our Mishnah cannot be reconciled with the view of R. Meir; for should it be assumed to agree with the view of R. Meir it may be pointed out that it was taught: A High Priest who is dedicated by the additional garments brings a bullock which is the prescribed sin offering for the transgression of all the commandments; these are the words of R. Meir, but the Sages did not agree with him. What is R. Meir's reason? Because it was taught: Anointed only implies a High Priest who was anointed with the anointing oil, whence, however, is it deduced that one dedicated by the additional garments only is also subject to that law? For it was expressly stated, If the priest the anointed.35 To whom, then is our Mishnah to be attributed? To the Rabbis!36
Horayoth 12bRead, however, the final clause: THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ACTING, AND THE RETIRED HIGH PRIEST IS THE BULLOCK ON THE DAY OF ATONEMENT AND THE TENTH PART OF THE EPHAH. This,1 surely, must represent the view of R. Meir! For it was taught: If some disqualification occurred in the High Priest who consequently retired and another priest was anointed in his stead, when the first2 returns to his ministry the other retains all the obligations relating to the priesthood; these are the words of R. Meir. R. Jose said: The first returns while the second is rendered unfit either as a High Priest or as an ordinary priest. Said R. Jose, once it happened with Joseph the son of Ailim of Sepphoris3 that, a disqualification in the High Priest having occurred, he4 was appointed in his stead; and when the incident was submitted to the Sages they ruled that the first returns to his ministry while the second is rendered unfit either as a High Priest or as an ordinary priest. [He is unfit as] a High Priest owing to enmity;5 [and he is unfit as] an ordinary priest, because, in the sphere of holiness, you may ascend, not descend.6 Does the first clause,7 then, represent the view of the Rabbis and the final clause7 that of R. Meir! — R. Hisda replied: Yes; the first clause represents the view of the Rabbis and the final clause that of R. Meir.
R. Joseph replied: The author of our Mishnah is Rabbi who based8 it upon the opinions of two Tannaim. Raba replied: The views represented9 are those of R. Simeon who agrees with R. Meir in one respect and differs from him in the other; as it was taught: The things which distinguish a High Priest from an ordinary priest are the following: The bullock that is offered for [the unwitting transgression of any of] all the commandments, and the bullock of the Day of Atonement, and the tenth part of the ephah; he must neither let his hair grow wild nor may he rend his garments, but he tears them from below while the ordinary priest tears them from above; he must not defile himself by [coming in contact with the dead bodies even of his] relatives; he is commanded to marry a virgin and is forbidden to marry a widow; he10 enables the manslayer to return to his home;11 he may offer sacrifices even while an onan,12 though he must not then eat of the sacrificial meat or take a share of it; he offers up his portion first and receives his portion first; he ministers in eight garments, and the entire service of the Day of Atonement may be performed by him alone; and he is also exempt from bringing a sacrifice for an unwitting transgression of defilement relating to the Sanctuary and its consecrated things. And all these laws are applicable to the High Priest who is dedicated by the additional garments alone, with the exception of the bullock that is offered for [the unwitting transgression of any of] 'all the commandments'. All these laws, furthermore, are also applicable to an anointed High Priest who [having acted as substitute] has retired from office, with the exception of the bullock of the Day of Atonement and the tenth part of the ephah. All these laws are inapplicable to a Priest anointed for War, with the exception of the five things that are specified in the Biblical Section under discussion: He must not let his hair grow wild nor may he rend his garments, he must not defile himself for the dead bodies of his relatives, he is commanded to marry a virgin and forbidden to marry a widow, and enables the manslayer to return to his home;13 so R. Judah. But the Sages said: He does not enable [the manslayer] to return.14
And whence is it proved that this Baraitha represents the view of R. Simeon? — R. Papa replied: Who was it that was heard to say that [the High Priest] is exempted in regard to an unwitting transgression of defilement relating to the Sanctuary and its consecrated things? Surely it was R. Simeon.15
'With the exception of the five things that are specified in the Biblical section under discussion.' Whence is this inference?16 — From that which our Rabbis taught: And the priest that is highest among his brethren,17 refers18 to the High Priest; upon whose head the anointing oil is poured,17 refers to the Priest who is anointed for War; and that is consecrated to put on the garments,17 refers to the High Priest who is dedicated by the additional garments alone. Concerning all of them it is stated, He shall not let the hair of his head grow wild,19 nor rend his clothes, neither shall he go in to any dead body.20 As one might assume that all of them may offer sacrifices while onans, it was specifically stated, For the consecration of the anointing oil of his God is upon him,21 upon 'him'22 but not upon his associate.23 Now that Scripture has excluded him23 it might have been assumed that he is not commanded to marry a Virgin, hence it was stated, And he [shall take a wife in her virginity].24
On this point25 Tannaim are in dispute: And he shall take a wife in her virginity,24 after Scripture has excluded him23 it included him again; so R. Ishmael. R. Akiba said: One could well have known26 [this law]27 in the case where he28 was [temporarily] removed on account of a mishap;29 whence, however, could it have been inferred [in the case where he was permanently removed] on account of disqualifying blemishes? Hence it was stated, 'And he.'24
Raba inquired of R. Nahman: May an anointed High Priest who was stricken with leprosy30 marry a widow;31 is he only suspended32 or is he exempt from all the duties of the High Priesthood?33 — He34 was unable to give an answer.35 Once R. Papa was sitting at his studies and raised the same inquiry. Said Huna the son of R. Nahman to R. Papa: We have learned [such a law]:36 'One could well have known [this law] in the case where he was [temporarily]37 removed on account of a mishap; whence, however, could it be inferred [in the case where he was permanently] removed on account of disqualifying blemishes? Hence it was stated, 'and he'. He38 thereupon arose, kissed him on his head and gave him his daughter.
MISHNAH. A HIGH PRIEST RENDS HIS GARMENTS39 FROM BELOW AND AN ORDINARY PRIEST FROM ABOVE. A HIGH PRIEST MAY OFFER SACRIFICES WHILE AN ON AN THOUGH HE MAY NOT EAT [OF THE SACRIFICIAL MEAT]; BUT AN ORDINARY PRIEST MAY [IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES] NEITHER OFFER SACRIFICES NOR EAT [OF SACRIFICIAL MEAT].
GEMARA. Rab said: BELOW means actually below40 and ABOVE means actually above.41 Samuel, however, said: BELOW means beneath the binding42 and ABOVE means above the binding,43 the one as well as the other being round the neck.
An objection was raised: In respect of all relatives44 a man may, if he wishes, sever45 his binding, and if he wishes he need not sever his binding. In respect of his father and mother, however, he must sever.46 Now, since [a tear made in such a manner]47 is elsewhere [regarded as a legally proper] tear, the prohibition for a High Priest to tear his garments should be applied to such a tear also!48 — Samuel is of the same opinion as R. Judah who said: Any tear that does not sever one's binding is nothing more than a wanton rent.49
Is R. Judah, however, of the opinion that the law of rending one's garments is applicable to a High Priest? Surely it was taught: If Scripture had only stated, 'He shall not let the hair of a head go loose, nor rend a garment' it might have been assumed that Scripture spoke of the head and the garment of a sotah,50 hence it was expressly stated, He shall not let the hair of his head grow wild, nor rend his clothes.51 showing that the requirements of letting one's hair grow wild or rending one's garments52 are not at all applicable to him;53 so R. Judah. R. Ishmael said: He does not rend his clothes in the manner of other people, but he rends from below while an ordinary priest rends from above!54 — Samuel holds the same opinion as R. Judah in one respect55 and disagrees with him in another.56
MISHNAH. WHATEVER IS MORE FREQUENT THAN ANOTHER TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THAT OTHER, AND WHATSOEVER IS MORE SACRED THAN ANOTHER TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THAT OTHER.
IF THE BULLOCK OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST AND THE BULLOCK OF THE CONGREGATION ARE SIMULTANEOUSLY PRESENTED,57 THE BULLOCK OF THE ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST MUST PRECEDE THAT OF THE CONGREGATION IN ALL ITS DETAILS.58
GEMARA. Whence are these laws deduced? — Abaye replied: From Scripture which stated, Besides the burnt offering of the morning which is for a continual burnt offering.59 Now consider, since it was written the burnt offering of the morning, what need was there for writing again continual burnt offering? Consequently it was this that the All Merciful intended: Whatsoever is more frequent takes precedence.
AND WHATSOEVER IS MORE SACRED THAN ANOTHER TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THAT OTHER. Whence is this deduced? — From what was taught at the School of R. Ishmael: Thou shalt sanctify him [the priest] therefore,60 in respect of any matter of sanctity; he must be the first in the reading of the Law, the first in the recital of any benediction61 and the first in receiving a handsome portion.
- To Next Folio -