And what is the meaning of four or five; i.e., when does the High Priest take four loaves and when does he take five? According to the Rabbis, who say: The priestly watch that is incoming on Shabbat takes six of the loaves, and the outgoing watch takes six, and the incoming watch receives no greater portion as payment for closing the doors, it is from twelve loaves that the High Priest must divide and take his share, but he receives half of the loaves less one, meaning that he takes five. According to the Rabbis, the High Priest receives less than half; however, since it is inappropriate to give him a piece of a loaf, less than half is five whole loaves.

According to Rabbi Yehuda, who said: The priestly watch that is incoming on Shabbat takes seven of the loaves, two of which are payment for closing the doors; and the outgoing watch takes five loaves, it is from ten that he must divide the loaves. Those two of the twelve loaves are a separate payment and are not factored into the tally of those designated for distribution. Subtract one from half of that total, as subtracting less than one loaf would lead to a situation where the High Priest receives a piece of a loaf, which is inappropriate. And therefore, the High Priest takes four.

Rava said that the baraita should be explained differently. The entire baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda that only ten loaves are divided. Rather, what then is the meaning of the statement that the High Priest takes four loaves? According to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, doesn’t he need to take five?

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This halakha that the High Priest takes four loaves is in a case where there is a watch that is detained. When the start of a Festival occurs on a Sunday night and one of the priestly watches was forced to arrive before Shabbat to ensure that they would arrive in time for the Festival; or, alternatively, if the Festival ended on a Thursday and one of the priestly watches was detained until the conclusion of Shabbat and only then departed, that priestly watch takes two loaves. That halakha that the High Priest takes five loaves is in a case where there is not a watch that is detained, and the shewbread in divided only between the watch that concludes its service that Shabbat and the watch that begins its service that Shabbat.

If there is a watch that is detained, that detained watch takes two loaves, and the outgoing watch takes two loaves as payment for closing the doors. Therefore, it is from eight that the High Priest must divide the loaves, and he takes four. If there is not a watch that is detained, it is from ten that he must divide the loaves and the High Priest takes five.

The Gemara asks: If so, that even the middle statement of the baraita is attributed to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and it is referring to a watch that is detained, what is the meaning of the last clause in the baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The High Priest always takes five loaves? That statement indicates that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi disagrees with the middle clause, while according to Rava’s interpretation Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi concedes that in certain circumstances the High Priest takes only four loaves. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is difficult to reconcile Rava’s interpretation with the language of the baraita.

MISHNA: The Sages provided the High Priest with Elders selected from the Elders of the court, and they would read before him the order of the service of the day of Yom Kippur. And they would say to him: My Master, High Priest. Read the order of the service with your own mouth, as perhaps you forgot this reading or perhaps you did not learn to read. On Yom Kippur eve in the morning, the Elders stand him at the eastern gate of the courtyard and pass before him bulls and rams and sheep so that he will be familiar with the animals and grow accustomed to the service, as these were the animals sacrificed on Yom Kippur. Throughout all the seven days that the High Priest was in the Parhedrin chamber, they would not withhold from him any food or drink that he desired. However, on Yom Kippur eve at nightfall, they would not allow him to eat a great deal because food induces sleep and they did not allow him to sleep, as will be explained.

GEMARA: The Gemara wonders about the depiction in the mishna of the Elders questioning the High Priest as to whether he forgot this reading or perhaps did not learn to read. Granted, perhaps he forgot, that is fine, as it is conceivable that he is not accustomed to reading the Torah and might have forgotten this portion. However, is it conceivable that perhaps the High Priest did not learn to read? Do we appoint a High Priest of that sort who never learned the Bible?

But wasn’t it taught in a baraita that it is stated: “And the priest who is greater than his brethren” (Leviticus 21:10); this teaches that he must be greater than his priestly brethren in strength, in beauty, in wisdom, and in wealth. Aḥerim say: Wealth is not a prerequisite for selecting a High Priest, but from where is it derived that if he does not have property of his own that his brethren the priests elevate him and render him wealthy from their own property? The verse states: “And the priest who is greater [haggadol] than his brethren”; elevate him [gaddelehu] from the property of his brethren. In any event, there is a consensus that wisdom is a prerequisite for his selection.

Rav Yosef said: This is not difficult. There, the baraita that lists wisdom among the attributes of the High Priest is referring to the First Temple, where this halakha was observed and the High Priests possessed those attributes listed. Here, the mishna is referring to the Second Temple, where this halakha was not observed, so a situation where the High Priest was not well-versed in the Bible was conceivable. As Rav Asi said: The wealthy Marta, daughter of Baitos, brought a half-se’a of dinars in to King Yannai for the fact that he appointed Yehoshua ben Gamla as High Priest. This is an example of the appointment of High Priests by means of bribery and gifts. Since that was the practice, a totally ignorant High Priest could have been appointed.

§ It was taught in the mishna: On Yom Kippur eve in the morning, the elders pass different animals before the High Priest. A tanna taught in the Tosefta: Even goats were brought before him. The Gemara asks: And the tanna of our mishna, what is the reason that he did not teach that goats were among the animals that passed before the High Priest? The Gemara answers: Since goats come as atonement for sins, passing them before the High Priest will evoke transgressions and he will become distraught.

The Gemara asks: If so, a bull should not be passed before him, as it too comes to atone for sin. The Gemara answers that there is a difference in the case of a bull, since it is to atone for his sins and for the sins of his brethren the priests that it comes; among his brethren the priests, if there is a person who has a sinful matter, the High Priest would know about it and lead him back to the path of righteousness through repentance. Therefore, passing a bull before the High Priest will not render him distraught, as it will merely remind him of his responsibility toward his priestly brethren. On the other hand, with regard to the entire Jewish people, he does not know of their sinful matters and is unable to facilitate their repentance. Passing goats before the High Priest will evoke their sins as well as his inability to correct the situation, leaving him distraught.

Apropos the High Priest being privy to the sinful behavior of his fellow priests, Ravina said that this explains the folk saying that people say: If the beloved son of your beloved sister becomes a policeman [dayyala], see to it that in the marketplace you do not pass before him. Be wary of him because he knows your sins.

§ We learned in the mishna: Throughout all the seven days that the High Priest was in the Parhedrin chamber, they would not withhold from him any food or drink that he desired. It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda ben Nekosa says: On Yom Kippur eve they feed him fine flour and eggs in order to loosen his bowels, so that he will not need to relieve himself on Yom Kippur. They said to Rabbi Yehuda ben Nekosa: In feeding him those foods, all the more so that you bring him to a state of arousal. Feeding him those foods is antithetical to the efforts to prevent the High Priest from becoming impure, as they are liable to cause him to experience a seminal emission.

It was taught in a baraita that Sumakhos said in the name of Rabbi Meir: One does not feed him foods represented by the acrostic: Alef, beit, yod; and some say that one does not feed him foods represented by the acrostic: Alef, beit, beit, yod; and some say neither does one feed him white wine. The Gemara elaborates: Not alef, beit, yod means neither etrog, nor eggs [beitzim], nor old wine [yayin]. And some say: Not alef, beit, beit, yod means neither etrog, nor eggs [beitzim], nor fatty meat [basar], nor old wine [yayin]. And some say neither does one feed him white wine because white wine brings a man to the impurity of a seminal emission.

Similarly, the Sages taught: If a man experienced an emission that could render him a zav, one attributes the emission not to his being a zav but perhaps to a different cause, e.g., to food, or to all kinds of food, i.e., he may have eaten too much food, which could have caused the emission. Elazar ben Pineḥas says in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira: During the days that a zav is examining himself to determine whether or not he is impure, one feeds him neither foods represented by the acrostic: Ḥet, gimmel, beit, yod, nor foods represented by the acrostic: Gimmel, beit, mem, nor any food items that might bring him to impurity caused by an emission. The Gemara explains: Not ḥet, gimmel, beit, yod means neither milk [ḥalav], nor cheese [gevina], nor egg [beitza], nor wine [yayin]. And not gimmel, beit, mem means neither soup of pounded beans [mei gerisin], nor fatty meat [basar], nor small fish pickled in brine [muryas].

The Gemara asks about the phrase: Nor any food items that might bring him to impurity; what does it come to include? It comes to include that which the Sages taught: Five food items bring a man to a state of impurity due to emission. And these are: Garlic,