The continual offering was offered up by nine, ten, eleven or twelve [priests], neither by more [than twelve], nor by less [than nine]. How that? [the offering] itself [was brought] up by nine; at the feast [of Sukkoth] when one carried a bottle of water, there were ten. At dusk by eleven: [the offering] itself by nine and two men who carried two logs of wood. On the Sabbath by eleven: [the offering] itself by nine with two men holding in their hand the two censers of frankincense for the Shewbread. And on the Sabbath which fell during the feast of Sukkoth one man carried in his hand a bottle of water.
t.Yom.2.5
A. The members of the household of Garmu were experts in making Show Bread and they did not want to teach others [how to make it] [cf. M.Yoma 3.11 B].
B. Sages sent and brought experts from Alexandria, in Egypt, who were expert in similar matters, but were not experts in removing it from the oven.
C. The members of the house of Garmu would heat the oven on the outside, and it [the loaf of bread] would be removed [on its own] on the inside.
D. The experts from Alexandria did not do so.
E. And some say this made it get moldy.
F. And when the sages learned of the matter, they said, ``The Holy One, blessed be he, created the world only for his own glory, as it is said, Everyone that is called by my name and whom I have created for my glory (Is.43.7), [so we might as well pay the tariff].``
G. They sent for them, and they did not come until they doubled their former salary.
H. ``They used to take a fee of twelve manehs every day, and now they went and took a fee of twenty-four,`` the words of R. Meir [T4].
I. R. Judah [T4; PA4 or PA5 in Y] says, ``Twenty-four did they take every day, and now they went and took forty-eight manehs.``
J. Said to them sages, ``Now why were you unwilling to teach?``
K. They said, ``The members of father`s house knew that the Temple is destined for destruction, and they did not want to teach others how to do it, so that they should not be able to do it before an idol in the way in which they do it before the Omnipresent.``
L. And on account of this next matter they are remembered with honor:
M. For a piece of clean bread was never found in the hands of their sons and daughters under any circumstances, so that people might not say about them, ``They are nourished from the Show Bread.``
N. This was meant to carry out the following verse: You shall be clean before the Lord and before Israel (Num.32.22).
MISHNAH: m.Yom.2.5The continual offering was offered up by nine, ten, eleven or twelve [priests], neither by more [than twelve], nor by less [than nine]. How that? [the offering] itself [was brought] up by nine; at the feast [of Sukkoth] when one carried a bottle of water, there were ten. At dusk by eleven: [the offering] itself by nine and two men who carried two logs of wood. On the Sabbath by eleven: [the offering] itself by nine with two men holding in their hand the two censers of frankincense for the Shewbread. And on the Sabbath which fell during the feast of Sukkoth one man carried in his hand a bottle of water.
GEMARA: R. R. Abba [BA3 & PA3], or as some say Rami b. Hama [BA4] or again as some say R. Johanan [PA2], said: The water libation on the Feast of Sukkoth is offered up only at the continual sacrifice of the morning. Whence is this to be inferred? Because [the Mishnah] teaches: and on the Sabbath which fell during the feast of Sukkoth one man carried in his hand a bottle of water. Now if the thought could arise in you that [also] at the continual offering at dusk is the water of libation offered up, then it would also happen during the weekday. R. Ashi [BA6] said: We also have learned thus: One said to the priest offering the libation: Hold your hands up! For it happened once that he poured it upon his feet and all the people stoned him with their citrons. This proves it. It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai [T4] said: Whence do we know that at the continual offering of dusk two logs of wood were to be brought up by two priests? Because it is said: And [the sons of Aaron the priest shall] lay wood in order upon the fire. If it has no bearing on the morning sacrifice because it is written: And the priest shall kindle wood on it every morning, and he shall lay the burnt-offering in order upon it, make it bear on the dusk sacrifice! But perhaps, say: Both refer to the morning sacrifice, the Divine Law enjoining: Do it! And do it! again. If that [were intended] the Divine Law should have said: `And he shall kindle wood.` `And he shall kindle wood.` But if the Divine Law had stated: `And he shall kindle [wood]` I would have assumed it may be done by one only, not by two, therefore we are taught that both one and two shall do so? If that were intended the Divine Law should have stated: `He shall kindle [wood]` . . . and `they shall kindle wood,` or `He shall lay [wood] in order` and `they shall lay [wood] in order.` Why the words `He shall kindle` and `They shall lay in order`? That we infer from it as we have said above. R. Hiyya taught: The [second] count at times [affects] thirteen priests, at times fourteen, fifteen, or sixteen. But has it not been taught: [At times] seventeen? That teaching is in accord not with R. Eliezer b. Jacob [T2 or T4], but with R. Judah [T4; PA4 or PA5 in Y].
m.Yom.2.5
[A] The daily whole-offering was offered by nine, ten, eleven, or twelve [priests], no less, no more.
[B] How so?
[C] It itself was offered by nine [priests].
[D] On the Festival [of Tabernacles], in the hand of one [additional priest] was a flask of water - thus ten.
[E] At dusk, by eleven: it itself by nine, and two, with two pieces of wood in their hands.
[F] And on the Sabbath, by eleven: it itself by nine and two priests, with two dishes of frankincense for the show bread in their hands.
[G] And on the Sabbath which coincides with the Festival [of Tabernacles], in the hand of yet another priest was a flask of water.
m.Yom.2.6
[H] A ram was offered by eleven: the meat by five, the innards, flour, and wine by two each.
m.Yom.2.7
[I] An ox was offered by twenty-four:
[J] the head and the right hind-leg - the head by one, and the right hind-leg by two;
[K] the rump and the left hind-leg - the rump by two, and the left hind-leg by two;
[L] the breast and the neck - the breast by one, and the neck by three;
[M] the two forelegs by two;
[N] the two flanks by two;
[O] the innards, the fine flour, and the wine by three each.
[P] Under what circumstances?
[Q] In the case of public offerings.
[R] But in the case of an individual`s offering,
[S] if [one priest] wanted to offer it up [all by himself], he offered it up.
[T] Flaying and cutting up both these and those [offerings] are subject to the same rules. y.Yom.2.4 I
[A] ``And [Aaron`s sons the priests] shall lay [the pieces, the head, and the fat, in order upon the wood that is on the fire upon the altar]`` (Lev.1.8).
[B] [With reference to Lev.15.25: ``(If a woman has a discharge of blood for many) days, (not at the time of her impurity, or if she has a discharge beyond the time of her impurity, all the days of the discharge she shall continue in uncleanness; as in the days of her impurity, she shall be unclean),``] is it possible to suppose that involved are a hundred [days]? Is it possible to suppose that involved are two hundred? [At issue is the number of days involved at Lev.15.25.]
[C] Said R. Aqiba, ``In any case in interpreting the law in which you have the choice of imposing either a considerable measure or a small measure, if you impose the larger criterion, you may end up holding on to nothing, while if you impose the smaller criterion [which in any case is encompassed in the larger one], you end up holding on to something. [Accordingly, one should assume the smallest possible number in interpreting a given requirement.]``
[D] It has been taught: R. Judah b. Beterah says, ``If you have two measures, one which contains what you wish to measure, and one which does not contain it [but is much larger], all measure with the one which contains what you wish to measure, and do not measure with the one which does not contain it.``
[E] Said R. Nehemiah [T4], ``Now does the Scripture come to open or to close [off possibilities]? Its purpose is not to close but to open, thus: If you say, `[If a woman has a discharge of blood for many] days, [not at the time of her impurity, or if she has a discharge beyond the time of her impurity, all the days of the discharge she shall continue in uncleanness; as in the days of her impurity, she shall be unclean]` (Lev.15.25), so that `days` means ten, [one might maintain] they are not ten but a hundred, two hundred, a thousand, ten thousand.
[F] ``If you say that `days` means two [days only], you have opened [the way, with the minimum plural being two].``
[G] [Working along this same line of thought,] R. Mana [PA5] said in the name of R. Judah [T4; PA4 or PA5 in Y], ```Days` means two days. Is it possible that there are many days [involved]? If you maintain that they are many days, has it not already been said `many`? Lo, Scripture speaks of only a few days, and how many are they? One must say, `They are two,` and `many` means they are three [in all].
[H] ``Is it possible to suppose that when it says `many,` it means ten?
[I] ``The Scripture has said `days,` and it has said `many.` Just as the smallest number of days is two, so the smallest addition referred to by `many` is three.
[J] ``Is it possible to reckon that the two and the three - lo they are five? [So if the flow persists for five days, the woman is unclean?]
[K] ``And is it said `days and many`? And is it not said only `many days`?
[L] ``How so? These many days should be more numerous than two, and how many are they? One must say `three.```
[M]] ``And Aaron`s sons the priests shall lay the pieces`` (Lev.1.8):
[N] Is it possible to maintain that there may be a hundred [priests]?
[O] Scripture states, ``And the priest shall lay them in order upon the wood`` (Lev.1.12).
[P] If Scripture states, ``And the priest shall lay them...,`` is it possible to suppose that it should be only a single priest to lay out all the limbs?
[Q] Scripture says, ``[And Aaron`s sons the priests] shall lay...``
[R] How so?
[S] One priest lays out two limbs.
[T] And how many limbs are there? Ten.
[U] And one for the innards.
[V] ``It turns out that a lamb is taken up to the altar by six priests,`` the words of R. Ishmael [T3].
[W] R. Aqiba says, ```And they shall lay` means two; `the sons of Aaron` means two; `the priests` means two. It turns out that six priests serve to bring a lamb up to the altar.``
[X] [The following is interpolated and does not belong:] ```The priests` serve to encompass the bald priests [and others who are blemished, that they too, even though they may not serve, nonetheless must avoid corpse-uncleanness in line with Lev.21.1ff.],`` the words of R. Judah [T4; PA4 or PA5 in Y].
[Y] [Reverting to V-W,] And does not Scripture speak of a beast of the herd?
[Z] And how do you derive from scripture that the passage ad dresses the daily whole-offering of the morning?
[AA] Simeon bar Ba [PA3], R. Yohanan [PA2] in the name of R. Yannai: ``Here, `laying out` is stated, and below, the same word is used: `And the priest shall lay them...` (Lev.1.12).
[BB] ``Just as when the word `laying out` is stated there, it speaks of the daily whole-offering of the morning, so when the word `laying out` is used here, it speaks of the daily whole- offering of the morning.``
[CC] Ulla bar Ishmael in the name of R. Eleazar [T4 in M or PA3]: ``It is not necessary [to introduce the analogy by the repeated use of the same word AA-BB]. On the basis of the use of the language `and they shall lay,` do we not know that they are two [priests who are to do the work]? And thus do you interpret the passage `and they shall lay out` refers to two; `the sons of Aaron` refers to two, `the priests` refers to two. [This discourse surely refers to the lamb offered in the morning, which is the first offering of the day. For this is the first thing to be placed on the wood on the fire .]
[DD] ``And so it has been taught: `You have nothing that takes precedence over the daily whole-offering in the morning, except for burning the incense alone.``` y.Yom.2.4 II
[A] [As to m.Yom.2.4H: A ram was offered by eleven.] Three priests can bring it up to the altar. And why is a ram offered by eleven priests?
[B] It is so as to make the matter well known [by the participation of many priests].
[C] Rabbis of Caesarea say, ``On what account is the bullock offered by no fewer than twenty-four priests? It is so as to make the matter well known.
[D] ``It is on the count of the following verse: `Within God`s house we walked in fellowship` (Ps.55.14).`` y.Yom.2.4 III
[A] [With reference to m.Yom.2.4Q-S, we shall now prove that an ox belonging to an individual may be offered even by six priests:] Interpret the pertinent verse as follows: ``And they shall lay out`` refers to two priests. ``Sons of Aaron`` refers to two priests. ``The priests`` refers to two priests.
[B] On the basis of this passage, then, we learn that the ox offered by an individual is to be brought up by six priests.