Halachah and Aggadah in Tractate Yomah
A
Paper by Shoeless Wanderer
Please do not redistribute without permission
After the destruction of the second temple by the Romans in 70 CE, religious authority shifted from the priests at the temple to the rabbis. The rabbis acted as the chief interpreters of scripture in the exiled Jewish communities, expounding on when certain laws in the torah were applicable to the present day community and when they were not. These rabbis would write down their opinions in the forms of the Talmud, Mishna, Midrash and Gemara. Within these forms two specific categories for the styles of writing, halachah and aggadah were formed. The halachah are laws and the interpretations of laws found in the torah whereas aggadah are stories or lore about God, famous rabbis, or biblical figures. Often halachah and aggadah are combined in the talmud, mishna, midrash and gemara. Many tractates reflect this combination of law and story, including tractate Yomah which combines a narrative story of the celebration of Yom Kippur along with the application of the rituals and laws found in Leviticus 16 that are associated with the Day of Atonement.
The elements of aggadah are easily identifiable in tractate Yomah. The overall tractate reads like a story, as it is given in a narrative form with few scriptural citations. In many instances where scripture is cited, the quoted text is put into the narrative framework itself such as in Yomah 3:8 where the priest quotes Lev 16:30 concerning the purpose of the holiday of Yom Kippur. Embedded scriptural citations also appear in Yomah 6:2 where Lev 16:30 is repeated. Yomah describes the actions of the priest performing the Yom Kippur ritual from a third person perspective such as in Yomah 6:6 where the text narrates
“What did he do? He divided the thread of crimson wool and tied one half to the rock and the other half between its horns, and he pushed it from behind; and it went rolling down, and before it had reached half the way down the hill it was broken in pieces.”
This passage demonstrates the
aggadah element of the priest leading the goat for Azazel out into the desert
in a clear prose format. This format is
occasionally interrupted by the rabbis themselves who add comments about the
narration or the actions of the priest, often citing scripture such as in
Yomah 6:6 where the text says “And from
what time does it render his garments unclean?
After he has gone outside the wall of
“He then entered…and sprinkled [the blood] once upwards and seven times onwards not as though he intended to sprinkle upwards or downwards but as though he were wielding a whip. And thus he used to count…”
This passage is repeated several times in Yomah 5:4, and with good reason. The mental image created is incredibly realistic. It lets the reader, or the layperson hearing the ritual described, get a clear mental image of how blood was sprinkled. It was done forcefully, splattering blood everywhere, not a light sprinkle. This imagery and simile adds to the story element. Yomah 6:3-5 returns to the aggadah form but through dialogue as the goat for Azazel is lead out into the wilderness. Here the dialogue of “Be [our sins] and be gone!” serves to illustrate the scene whereas previous passages in Yomah that represent the aggadah element have been through prose descriptions.
Halachah is also present in the text of tractate Yomah. However, the halachah is often embedded in the prose and aggadah of Yomah. The most obvious instance of halachah appears at the end of Yomah. All of Yomah 8 is halachah, as it describes the forbidden actions on the Day of Atonement and how, given a particular situation, the performance of a forbidden action should be handled. For instance, Yomah 8:3 states that if a man accidentally eats and drinks on Yom Kippur then he only must bring forth one sin offering whereas if
“…he ate and also performed an act of work” then two sin offerings must be brought to the temple. It then goes on to say that if the food or drink consumed are not “fit for eating…fit for drinking, or even if he drank brine or fish brine…”
then the man does not have to make a sin offering at all. This is halachah in its purest and most obvious form, where an instance of scripture is given and then conditions where the scripture can and cannot be applied follow the instance. Chapter 8 also includes halachah about the Day of Atonement ritual itself in 8:9. This instance is interesting because of how the rabbis approach the situation.
“If a man said ‘I will sin and repent and sin again and repent’ he will be given no chance to repent. [If he said] ‘I will sin and the Day of a Atonement will affect Atonement, then the day of Atonement effects no atonement…for transgressions that are between a man and his fellow the Day of Atonement effects atonement only if he has appease his fellow. This did R. Elezar b. Azariah expound: From all your sins shall ye be clean before the Lord.”
The scripture cited here seems ambiguous and the text following it in 8:9 is redundant, as it states “for transgressions that are between man and God the Day of Atonement effects atonement; but for transgressions that are between a man and his fellow the day of atonement effects atonement only if he has appeased his fellow,” reiterating the previous part of the passage almost verbatim. The passage cited is again Lev 16:30 which appears often in tractate Yomah. The appearance of this particular quotation is interesting as it states “For on this day atonement shall be made for you to cleanse you of all your sins; you shall be clean before the Lord.” It is most likely invoked to reiterate the purpose of Yom Kippur. However, the citation in the context of Yomah 8:9 seems odd, as Leviticus 16 itself does not mention there being a specific ritual for atoning to a fellow human being. The commentary implies that Jews at the time felt that while God can forgive sins made against Him, only other men can forgive sins made against them. On the other hand, the citation from Leviticus seems to imply that regardless of setting things right with fellow human being atonement will still be affected. The passage is puzzling. More straightforward halachah appears in Yomah 4-6:2, although within the aggadah form. The overall description sacrifice adheres to the text of Leviticus, but smaller instances of halachah also appear within the larger text of tractate Yomah itself. Yomah 6:1, for example, describes the goats that are sacrifices on Yom Kippur. This passage states that “the two he-goats…should be alike in appearance, in size and in value…if they are not alike they are valid…if one of them died before the lot was cast a fellow may be brought…”, describing how to tell if the two he-goats constitute a proper sacrifice for the Yom Kippur ritual. Instances of halachah are also found in the direct quotations of the scriptures such as the embedded citations of Lev 16: 30 found in Yomah 3:8 and 6:2.
In many cases, tractates from the rabbinic period can be easily classified as halachah or aggadah, law or lore. In the case of many halachah tractates, such texts can become very tedious, as it seems like the rabbis are splitting incredibly fine hairs. However, these two styles of commentary on the laws of the torah can be combined to create a very distinct text such as tractate Yomah where the law is expounded upon and made more compelling by the story that surrounds it.