19 Sep YOM KIPPUR ON YOM KIPPUR WE NEED SHALOM

The Mishna in
Maseches Yoma (1:5)
says that in
preparation for the
Yom Kippur Service,
the elders of the Beis Din
transferred the Kohen
Gado lto the elders of the Kohanim, who
brought him to the attic of the Chamber of
Avtinas, where they made him take an oath.
They made him swear in the Name of “the One
who caused His Presence to dwell in this
House” that he would not deviate in the
slightest way from the prescribed order of the
Yom Kippur Service, as taught to him by the
elders of the Beis Din.
The Mishna concludes that following
administration of this oath, theKohen
Gadolwould turn aside and cry (that he was
suspected of being a Tzeduki (member of the
Sadducee sect, who rejected the Oral Law) and
not carrying out the directions of the Ziknei
Beis Din) and the elders of the Kohanim would
turn aside and cry (for having to suspect the
Kohen Gadol of such a violation, inasmuch as
the Talmud says elsewhere (Shabbat 97a) that
someone who unjustly suspects a worthy
person will receive corporal punishment).
Throughout the period of the Second Beis
HaMikdash, the Tzedukim promoted improper
changes to halachic practices, including
variations to the Yom Kippur service in the
Bais Hamikdash. Unfortunately, there were
many Kohanim Gedolim during portions of the
Second Bais Hamikdash period who were
adherents of the Tzeduki philosophy. Therefore,
the Beis Din always needed to be on guard, lest
the Kohen Gadol pull a fast one in the privacy
of the Kodesh Kodoshim (where no one could
observe his performance of the Yom Kippur
ritual) and carry out the procedure there in
accordance with Tzeduki interpretation.
Inasmuch as even the Tzedukim were fearful of
taking a false oath, this oath was used to
preempt any attempt at corruption of Halacha,
as proscribed by the BeisDin, which was under
control of the Perushim (Pharisees) who
accepted the Oral Law.
The Rambam (Hilchos Avodas Yom
HaKippurim 1:7) elaborates on this Mishna in
Yoma, explaining that the Tzedukim, who
denied the Oral Tradition of Chazal, went with
the literal interpretation of the pesukim in
Parshas Achrei Mos. For example, they said
that the Yom Kippur Ketores-incense should be
placed on coals outside the Kodesh Kodoshim,
and the Kohen Gadol should only enter the
Kodesh Hakodashim when the cloud of smoke
was already ascending from the shovel
containing the incense. The mesorah of Chazal
is that the incense should only be placed on the
coals “Lifnei Hashem” – within the confines of
the Kodesh Kodoshim.
When the Rambam describes the adjuration of
the Kohen Gadol not to deviate from Chazal‘s
prescribed procedure, he includes the fact that
both the Kohen Gadol and those who adjured
him turned aside to cry following the
administration of the oath—he because he was
suspected, and they because they feared they
might be falsely suspecting a worthy person.
The Rambam’s Mishna Torah is a Code of
Jewish Law. It is not a history book. Why was
it necessary for the Rambam to describe what

(unfortunately) took place during the Second
Bais Hamikdash era due to the concern of the
Beis Din that Tzeduki philosophies might have
infiltrated the practice of the Kohanim Gedolim
of that era? May it be G-d’s Will that the third
Bais Hamikdash will be rebuilt speedily in our
day and we will re-institute the Yom Kippur
Service according to halacha. There will not be
any Tzedukim during the time of the Third Bais
Hamikdash! Their existence was a historical
phenomenon that occurred during the period of
the Second Bais Hamikdash, which will never
occur again. The Mishna needed to describe
what happened because the Mishna was
describing the entire order of Yom Kippur as it
took place during the Second Bais Hamikdash
period. But why does the Rambam need to
mention the oath? Furthermore, why did the
Rambam need to tell us that “they turned away
crying”? Why do we need to know this fact,
which has absolutely no practical halachic
ramification?
More to the point, there is a very interesting
Mishna in Masechtas Derech Eretz (3:3). The
Mishna there says that we should view every
person as if he were a robber and yet honor him
as if he were Rabban Gamliel. When a stranger
comes into your house and you do not know
who he is, you should honor him as if he were
the great sage and Prince, Rabban Gamliel.
Give him the royal treatment and five-star
hospitality. And yet, you need to consider the
possibility that he might be a thief.
The Mishna relates that there was an incident
involving Rabbi Yehoshua where a stranger
came to his house. Rabbi Yehoshua fed the
fellow and gave him drink and offered him the
guest room on the second floor, in the attic. The
guest went up the ladder to the guest room at
night. Lo and behold, in the middle of the night
he took a bag and started stealing all the
silverware from upstairs. He wanted to make
his midnight escape. He descended the ladder
from the second floor to the first floor. However,
Rabbi Yehoshua (following the above stated
advice) had removed the ladder. The “guest”
started climbing down and suddenly realized
there was no ladder. He fell to the ground with
a loud thud, and was caught red-handed with
the silverware that he was trying to steal from
his host.
So we see that the Mishna strongly endorses
this concept that if a person does not know
about another person’s character, he should
definitely be suspicious of him and—with all
due respect—treat him cautiously and
suspiciously. If so, what were the Ziknei Beis
Din crying about? They had every right to
administer this oath and be suspicious of the
Kohen Gadol during the time of the Second
Bais Hamikdash when Tzeduki heresy was
widespread in Israel in general, and in the
Priestly class in particular.Beis Din had an
obligation to be suspicious! Many Rishonim
ask on this Mishna in Yoma from the teaching
in Maseches Derech Eretz: Why did they turn
aside and cry?
So, in addition to the questions why the
Rambam mentioned the oath and why the
Rambam mentioned the crying, we have a third
question: Why in fact did they need to turn
away and cry at all? They were doing what they
were supposed to do!
The Tolner Rebbe raises these questions and

suggests the following answer, based on an
important teaching from the Sefas Emes:
The Gemara in Yoma (87b) relates that the
Amora who we know as Rav was saying over a
shiur in front of Rebbi. Rav Chiya walked in
and Rav restarted his shiur. Bar Kappara then
arrived, also late. Rav restarted his shiur a third
time. Then Rav Shimon b’Rebi walked in, and
Rav restarted his shiur a fourth time. Finally,
Rabbi Chanina b’Reb Chama came in, and Rav
finally had enough. He refused to start his shiur
a fifth time, and just continued the shiur. The
Gemara comments that Rabbi Chanina got
upset that Rav did not show him the same
courtesy that he had shown the other late
arrivals.
The Gemara then relates that for the next
thirteen years, Rav approached Rabbi Chanina
each Erev Yom Kippur to ask for forgiveness.
Rabbi Chanina refused to be mochel him. We
are not going to get into why Rabbi Chanina
was so upset and refused to forgive Rav, but
those are the facts.
The Sefas Emes asks, why did Rav need to ask
for forgiveness in the first place? Rav was in
the right! He could justifiably tell Rabbi
Chanina, “How many times do I need to restart
my shiur? You were late for shiur. You were
very late because there were already three
people ahead of you who were also late for
shiur! Restarting for them was a midas
chassidus. I am not obligated to repeat such a
midas chassidus over and over again, troubling
the entire audience for the sake of latecomers!”
If someone is upset at you but you are 100%
right, and this is not just your opinion, but you
ask your Rav and you ask other people and they
all tell you that you are 100% right, do you
need to ask mechila? No! If you are right, you
are right!
The Sefas Emes answers with a very important
principle: The entire year, if you are 100% in
the right, you are not obligated to ask for
forgiveness. But Yom Kippur is different! On
Yom Kippur, you are obligated to ask for
mechila even if you are right and the other
person is wrong. Why is that? It is because we
read in Tehillim (139:16) “…the days are
created (yomim yutzaru) and not one of them
(v’lo echad mei’hem).” There is a kri u’kesiv
on this last phrase (v’lo echad mei’hem). Does
the word v’lo end with an aleph (lamed aleph
meaning no or not) or with a vov (lamed vov
meaning him)? The kesiv (the way it is written)
is with an aleph, meaning ‘and one of them’
(one of the days created) is not it. The kri (the
way it is read) is lo with a vov.
The Tanna d’bei Eliyahu expounds: v’lo echad
mei’hem is referring to Yom Kippur (the day
which is not one of those other created days).
There are 364 days plus one in the year. Yom
Kippur is its own day. It is not a regular day.
The Satan has no effect on us on this day. We
are like Malachim on this day.
The Sefas Emes interprets v’lo ecahd mei’hem
as follows: Yom Kippur needs to be a day of
achdus (Jewish unity). We come together as
Klal Yisrael with the Ribono shel Olam and we
need to come together as a people as one unit.
Normally, when someone does something to
you and you are in the right and he is 100%
wrong, you do not need to be worried about it.
However, on Yom Kippur you need to try to
accomplish something else—you need to try to

bring everyone together. Therefore, even
though you are in the right, you need to try to
appease this other person, to create national
unity.
This explains why Rav only went to Rabbi
Chanina on Erev Yom Kippur. Why didn’t Rav
ask for mechila immediately after finishing the
shiur? Why didn’t he wait a couple of days
until Rabbi Chanina cooled off and then ask for
mechila? Why did he always go Erev Yom
Kippur? The answer is that Rav did not need to
ask for forgiveness during the rest of the year
because Rav was right and Rabbi Chanina was
wrong. But on Erev Yom Kippur, the mission is
to remove all “pirud“—the things that separate
people. The mission is not to gain mechila, the
mission is to create Shalom(peace).
This now also explains why the Ziknei Beis
Din turned away to cry after adjuring the
Kohen Gadol. We saw in Maseches Derech
Eretz that it is proper to be suspicious! What
was wrong with suspecting him, such that they
needed to cry about it? The answer is that they
were aware that their action caused pirud—
disunity—in Klal Yisrael. True, they did what
they were supposed to do, but they knew that
inevitably, their actions would cause resentment
in the (conceivably totally virtuous)Kohen
Gadol. They cried because of the inevitable
dissension they were causing in Klal Yisrae lon
Erev Yom HaKippurim.
Finally, the Tolner Rebbe says, we can now
understand why the Rambam wrote this entire
story. Although the story of the oath and
certainly their turning aside and crying will not
be at all relevant, please G-d, during the time of
the Third Beis HaMikdash, the Rambam is
trying to teach us this lesson. The reason they
cried is because their action caused dissension
on Erev Yom Kippur, and any dissension is not
good at that time.
The lesson for all of us is that even though
throughout the course of the year, we may have
had issues with people—be it family, be it
friends, be it neighbors, whoever it may be—
even if we are 100% in the right, we need to try
to make shalom in order to create this achdus.
That is why it is important to know that “they
turned aside and cried.” They did not turn aside
and cry because they were wrong. They were
doing exactly what they were supposed to do.
But the fact is that they caused disunity, which
we must try hard to avoid on Yom Kippur.
Chazal say that on Yom Kippur we are like
angels. Amongst angels, there is no jealousy
and no competition. That is the type of spirit we
need to try to foster. Let bygones be bygones.
So many times, people think, “I am in the right.
I don’t need to ask mechila. He needs to ask
mechila!” True. That is in terms of the laws of
Mechila and the laws of proper behavior
between man and his fellow man. But Yom
Kippur is a different day. V’lo Echad Mei’hem.
It is a special day—a day that unifies Klal
Yisrae lbefore the Ribono shel Olam and a day
when Klal Yisraelneeds to come together as
one people, without jealousy, without