At the bottom of the amud the Gemara asks, if the Kohen Godol becomes posul after the Tamid was brought, how was the replacement turned into the Kohen Godol, assuming the Avneit of the Kohen Godol and of the Kohen Hedyot are different?
Abaye says he puts on the 8 begadim, and will turn over a limb on the mizbeiach and it will burn faster.
Question: since this is not a critical avoda of yom kippur, why pick something which is chilul yom kippur a melacha? In fact why is it permitted to be mechalel yom kippur for non critical avoda?
Thank you
This question is asked by the Sfas Emes here. He answers with Rashi Eruvin 102b, in the Mishnah DH Koshrin, that if a string of the kinor of the Leviim snapped on Shabbos one is allowed to tie it, since this is a Machshir for a Mitzvah
(of playing a musical instrument when bringing a korban) that could not be done before Shabbos. Similarly here, since one cannot continue with the Avodah on Yom Kippur without turning over the limb, one is allowed to do Melachah on Yom Kippur. [however Sfas Emes then asks a question on this from Talmud Yerushalmi Pesachim].
We should remember that the Gemara states below 46b that the Avodah of the Beis Hamikdash is Hutrah on Shabbos, not Dechuyah.
Good Shabbos
Dovid Bloom
Follow-up reply:
I think I have not really answered the question that why pick something which is chilul yom kipur a melacha? In other words; since the Cohen is looking for an avoda to do, why does he not, for instance, do kabolos hadam?! He could find a korban that was being slaughtered and receive the blood in the kli. There is no melacha involved in doing this, so it would seem to be preferable than turning over the limb, which involves the melacha of Havora?!
I think the answer must be that since the Gemara 46b states that the Avodah of the Beis Hamikdash is hutrah on Shabbos, as I mentioned above, this means that we can compare it to the opinion of Rav Nachman; in the Gemara above 6b; that if we say that Tumah is hutrah it follows that we do not have to go looking for pure Cohanim to do the Avodah. Similarly, if there is a limb of the korban tomid that can be turned over, there is no need to try and look for an avodah that does not involve chilul yom kipur, because the Avodah is Hutrah.
Shavua Tov
Dovid Bloom
Further comment:
I discussed this question with a Talmid Chacham and he pointed out that the above answer may not be correct, because the Gemara Beitzah 19a states that one does not bring korbanos of Nedarim and Nedavos on Yomtov so it may be that there simply was no available korban for which the Cohen could do kabolas hadam so the only possible avodah he could do to act as chinuch was Mehapech beTzinora.
KOL TUV
Dovid Bloom
The explanation of the Aruch LaNer and the Aruch Hashulchan:
1) It is important to know that the Aruch LaNer, in Makos 11a on Rashi DH veEchad Hamerubeh, writes that the dispute between Abaye and Rav Papa is about whether we say "Avodaso Mechanchaso". Aruch LaNer writes that it is only Rav Papa who holds that Avodaso Mechanchaso, but Abaye disagrees.
2) The Future Aruch Hashulchan Kodashim 158:11 also writes that the dispute between Abaye and Rav Papa here is whether one says Avodaso Mechanchaso. Rav Papa holds that it is sufficient merely to act as the Cohen Gadol for this to be considered as Chinuch to be acceptable as the Cohen Gadol. Abaye does not agree with Rav Papa and holds that one has to do some other avodah to receive one's Chinuch as Cohen Gadol. Aruch Hashulchan writes that since one cannot rely on Avodaso Mechanchaso it follows that one can turn over the limb. He writes that Rav Papa holds that one may not do this because it involves the melacha of Mavir; one is burning on Yom Kippur. According to Aruch Hashulchan this is in itself the dispute between Abaye and Rav Papa. Because Abaye does not hold of Avodaso Mechanchaso, if one is Mehapech beTzinora this becomes "Tzorech Avodah"; it is necessary for the Avodah; and therefore one may do it even though it involves a Melacha because one is allowed to do melachos on Yom Kippur if this is necessary for the avodah. Rav Papa disagrees and maintains that since Avodaso Mechanchaso it is no longer necessary to turn over the limb, and automatically the issur of mavir; burning; on Yom Kippur means that one may not do this.
Dovid Bloom
Thanks for all your great replies.
When I learned the Gemara this question bothered me.
However after I saw the following tosfos yeshanim i thought that I might have to explain differently:
Tosfos yeshanim 012 b DH 'avneito shel kohen hedyot' asks why should the hedyot need his garments on YK and and his second answer is: 'lehapech b'tzinoro'
So while before I saw this I understood that we made the kohen gadol do it only in order to do an avoda with the 8 clothes - hence your question of why should he and why is it mutar- now I think that this was necessary to be done anyway and therefore allowed (as they used a hedyot usually) and the only when needed the - new - kohen gadol did it as a form of chinuch.
Kol tuv
Reb Moishy, that is an important Tosfos Yeshanim that you have brought.
1) Yes, we see from the Tosfos Rosh here (who explains slightly more what the Tosfos Yeshanim writes) that even though the Gemara below bottom 32b states that all the avodos of Yom Kipur are only kosher with the Cohen Gadol, there are actually some exceptions to this. Arranging the 2 logs of wood, or mehapech b'tzinura, are avodos that require a Cohen but are not such essential avodos that they should require a Cohen Gadol. Tosfos Rosh writes that strirring the tzinura is only kiruv avoda; it makes the avoda nearer but it is not actually the avodah itself. The Ritva here writes that lehapech btzinura is not the ikar avoda so whilst it needs bigdei kehuna it can be done by a Cohen Hedyot. Tosfos Yeshanim below 45a DH Hayom Olin writes that other Cohanim go up the ramp of the Mizbeach with the Cohen Gadol to help him lehapech betzinora.
2) I think that all this can be understood better with what the Ra'avad in Maseches Tomid 32a writes that if a Cohen is mechalel Shabbos in the Beis Hamikdash for something that is not needed for the avodah he is chayav, and we do not say that since the Cohanim have permssion to break Shabbos in the Beis Hamikdash for the needs of avodah they can now be mechalel Shabbos even for something not needed for the avodah. What we see now from mehapech b'tzinura is that even though it is not the ikar avodah, it still brings the avodah nearer, so this means that it is needed for the avoda and it follwos that either a Cohen Gadol or a Cohen Hedyot can be mechalel Shabbos for it.
Yasher Koach
Dovid Bloom