Klei Hamikdash - Chapter 8

As mentioned in the notes to the previous chapter, the Radbaz explains that this is implied by the very Hebrew term used for linen sheish, for that term also means “six.” See Halachah 14.

The Torah (Exodus 39:29) mentions the use of woolen fabrics only with regard to the sash of the High Priest, but through the process of Biblical exegesis, our Sages (Yoma 12b) also derived that the sash of an ordinary priest also contains these fabrics.

Although the combination of these fabrics violates the prohibition against shaatnez (see Hilchot Kilayim, ch. 12), the positive commandment of wearing the Priestly Garments overrides the negative commandment of shaatnez. Nevertheless, this applies only when it is a mitzvah to wear them, i.e., when involved in the Temple service. Otherwise, it is forbidden to wear them (Hilchot Kilayim 10:3).

As the Rambam proceeds to explain, these garments were not all golden. Nevertheless, they are called golden because certain garments were golden.

Exodus 28:39.

Exodus 28:4.

Ibid.:40.

The Kessef Mishneh cites the Ramban who states that the headgear of both the ordinary priests and the High Priests were turbans. This is also indicated by Halachah 18 which speaks of their length. The turban of the High Priest, however, was round, while those of the ordinary priests were cone-shaped like hats. Other authorities (Rashi and the Ra’avad) differ and maintain that the ordinary priests wore hats and not turbans.

With regard to this point as well, the Kessef Mishneh cites the Ramban who states that the letters kuf and gimmel can be interchanged. Thus migba’at parallels mikva’at that relates to the word kova, hat.

More particularly, they are the garments that he would wear when he performed the service unique to Yom Kippur. For he would also wear his golden garments on that day and carry out the service that was also performed on other days while wearing them. See Hilchot Avodat Yom HaKippurim 2:1.

I.e., even the sash was made from linen alone. On this day, it was not of shaatnez.

To perform the sacrificial service of Yom Kippur.

To remove from the Holy of Holies the ladle that had carried the incense.

A maneh is 100 silver pieces. Thus these were very expensive garments, made of fine fabric. The commentaries note that Yoma 35a states that the garments the High Priest would wear in the morning were more valuable than those he would wear in the evening and question why the Rambam does not mention this point. See also the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Yoma 3:7) which states that the only difference between the two was their cut.

I.e., funds from terumat halishkah, the Temple treasury collected to purchase the communal sacrifices and all their needs. See Halachah 7 and Hilchot Shekalim 4:2.

Our translation is based on Rashi’s commentary to Zevachim 18b.

The commentaries have drawn attention to an apparent contradiction in the Rambam’s words, for in Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 1:14, he rules that, after the fact, when a priest performs service in torn garments, although he is liable to die at the hand of heaven, his service is acceptable. Among the resolutions offered is that here, the Rambam is speaking about clothes that remain torn. Hence, it is as if he is no longer wearing that garment. In Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash, by contrast, he is speaking about torn garments that were mended. As the Radbaz explains (in his gloss there), the Rambam is speaking about a tear like the tear made when one rends his garments in mourning which can be mended. Here, he is speaking about a garment that was torn in many places.

I.e., they should reach slightly above the ground, extending until above the priest's heel (Halachah 17). If they drag along the ground, they are disqualified. That is the intent of the phrase "too long" mentioned later (Kessef Mishneh).

It is as if the material hoisted up by the sash was cut off (Zevachim 18b).

It is as if he performed the service without wearing priestly garments at all.

For there should be no expressions of poverty in a place of wealth (Zevachim 88b).

I.e., the golden garments.

Although this is not stated explicitly, it is deduced from a comparison to the white garments (Yoma 12b).

These were not used for the Menorah. The rationale is that since the sash contains wool, it will not serve as an effective wick (see Shabbat 20b,21a). And it is improper to use the leggings for that purpose since the priest wore them on his lower body (Tifferet Yisrael, Sukkah 5:3).

See the conclusion of Hilchot Lulav where this rejoicing is described. Significantly, however, there the Rambam does not connect the rejoicing with the water libation.

The Kessef Mishneh asks why the Rambam does not mention the hats of the ordinary priests. He offers two possible resolutions:
a) their fabric was thin and not suitable for wicks at all;
b) they were in fact used for the Menorah.

In contrast to the lamps for the water libation rejoicing which took place only during the Sukkot holiday.

I.e., generally, we think of the community purchasing these items by using funds from the Temple treasury. If, however, an individual donates these substances to the Temple treasury they also become communal property and then can be used for whatever purpose the community desires.

I.e., a set with four garments: leggings, a tunic, a sash, and a hat.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sukkah 5:6), the Rambam speaks of 24 lockers. Rambam LeAm suggests that each watch had one large locker which in tum had four compartments.

Having the garments sorted individually made it easier for the priests to put on the garments in the proper order: first, the leggings, then, the tunic, the sash, and the hat [see Chapter 10, Halachah 1; see also the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Tamid 5:3)].

The Chamber of the High Priest. See Chapter 5, Halachah 7.
Har HaMoriah writes that since the Talmud does not mention that there was a locker for the High Priest’s garments, we can assume there was none and that he would leave them in his chamber.

Tosafot, Yoma 69a, suggests that as an initial preference, a priest should not benefit from them. In practice, however, that is not possible, because “the Torah was not given to the ministering angels” and it is impossible for the priests to remove the priestly garments immediately after their Temple service was completed (Kiddushin 54b). Hence they were consecrated with the stipulation that the priests would derive personal benefit from them.

A prohibited mixture of fabrics. During the Temple service, however, it may be worn, because then it is a mitzvah to do so and the observance of a positive mitzvah supersedes the observance of a prohibition. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that the sash may be worn throughout the day, as long as the priest is in the Temple.
Rav Yosef Corcus mentions that the ephod and the breastplate of the High Priest also involved a forbidden mixture of fabrics. He explains, however, that according to the Rambam, the prohibition against mixed fabrics does not apply to them, because they are not worn to provide the body with warmth, and if a garment is worn for a purpose other than that, this prohibition does not apply (Hilchot Kilayim 10:19).

See Hilchot Tuma’at Tzara’at 1:4 where the Rambam defines patuch as a color mixed with white. See also Hilchot Tzitzit 2:1.

There are some who interpret the term as referring to a purplish dye. Others explain that it is mixture of several dyes of thread. See Ra’avad and Kessef Mishneh.

See Hilchot Parah Adumah 3:2 where the Rambam writes that this dye is produced from a seed that has a small gnat in it that produces a scarlet color.

I.e., one strand made up of six thinner threads.

Often translated as twisted.

See the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Chulin 3:1). The boxes were indented slightly, like small pockets.

For as mentioned in Halachah 4, the priests’ garments should be made to fit to their measure, neither too long, nor too short. Compare to the description of the clothes of Torah scholars in Hilchot De’ot 5:9.

To tighten them around the priest’s waist.

As explained in Halachah 2, according to the Rambam, the difference was the manner in which they wrapped the turbans. The actual cloth was the same.

A fingerbreadth is about 2 cm according to Shiurei Torah.