R. Yochanan taught, like a braid.

The Beraisa teaches that those who burned the Par and Sa'ir would not cut it up after flaying it (like an Olah); rather, it would be cut up without flaying.

Question: How do we know both of these things (that they cut them up and did so without flaying them)?

Answer: The words "Or", "Basar" and "Peresh" link the Par/Sa'ir to the Chatas Kohen Mashi'ach (where there was Nitu'ach without Hefshet).

Question: What is the source by Chatas Kohen Mashi'ach?

Answer: The Beraisa learns it from the Pasuk "ve'Hotzei".

Question: Perhaps it should also be burned whole?

Answer: By linking it to the Olah the Torah teaches that the parts are to be separate.

Question: Perhaps we should learn from Olah that it requires Hefshet?

Answer: "ve'Kirbo u'Firsho" teaches that it was burnt without Hefshet.

Question: How do those words demonstrate that?

Answer (R. Papa): The Torah links the removal of the Eimurim and Peresh with flaying the hide and flesh of the Par, that both are done without Hefshet.

Question (Beraisa): Why does the Torah speak of leaving three Machanos for Sereifah by the Par ha'Eidah (He'elam Davar) and Kohen Mashi'ach, while by the Par Yom ha'Kipurim, which is identical, the Pasuk speaks of leaving only one Machaneh?

Answer: It must be that the one Machaneh identifies the point of Tum'as Begadim.

Question: What is the source that the Par He'elam Davar is burned outside three Machanos?

Answer: The Pasuk "ve'Hotzei ... mi'Chutz la'Machaneh" implies outside three Machanos.

Question: Perhaps this implies outside one Machaneh?

Answer: There are three indications of going out. Two references to taking out.

The Pasuk teaches that the Par ha'Eidah is to be burnt in the same way as the Par Kohen Mashiach. These combine to push us out of three Machanos.

Question: What will R. Shimon do with "mi'Chutz la'Machaneh"?

Answer: It serves to link the Parah Adumah with the Par Yom ha'Kipurim.

Thus the Shechitah of the Parah Adumah is outside the three Machanos, like the burning of the Par.

Further, the Par Yom Kipur is done in the East, like the Parah Adumah.

Question: Where would the Rabanan (who do not utilize "mi'Chutz la'Machaneh" in this way) locate the burning of the Par and Sa'ir?

Answer: In the North, outside the three Machanos.

Answer (R. Yosi): In the Beis ha'Deshen, meaning that ashes from the Mizbe'ach must first be brought to that place to render it a Makom Shefech ha'Deshen.

Question (Rava): Which Tana disagrees with this?

Answer: It is R. Eliezer b. Ya'akov, who interprets "El Shefech ha'Deshen": to mean that the place must be on a tilt.

Question (Abaye): Perhaps R. Eliezer b. Ya'akov is coming only to add that requirement (not to disagree)!?

The ones who do, or assist in, the actual burning contract the Tum'ah, but not the ones who arrange or ignite the wood.

It is a Machlokes regarding the point beyond which the Parah no longer imparts Tum'ah.

(Tana Kama): Once it is ash.

(R. Eliezer b. R. Shimon): Once it is scorched and not thought of as Parah.

The difference between them is if it is scorched but not yet ash.

The Kohen Gadol was notified of the Sa'ir's arrival at the Midbar, such that he may continue the Avodah.

There are three opinions regarding how they knew:

(Tana Kama): They would wave a signal from one lookout to the next back to Yerushalayim.

(R. Yehudah): They would time the return of the first group of escorts to when the usher would arrive at the Midbar (three Mil to Beis Chidudo).

(R. Yishmael): The red thread would turn white.

(Abaye): We see that Beis Chidudo is in the Midbar.

This teaches that, according to R. Yehudah, arrival alone to the Midbar is sufficient to allow the Kohen Gadol to continue the Avodah.

The Kohen Gadol went to the Ezras Nashim (dressed either in the Bigdei Lavan or in his personal white garments).

The Sefer Torah was passed by the Shamash of the Beis ha'Keneses to the Gabai who handed it to the S'gan who gave it to the Kohen Gadol.

The Kohen Gadol read from 'Acharei Mos' and 'Emor'.

He then rolled up and held the Sefer, announcing that there is more contained within.

He read the Parshas of Musaf (from Pinchas) by heart.

He recited eight Berachos, as listed.

The burning of the Par/Sa'ir and the Keri'as ha'Torah took place at the same time in different locations such that one who attended one could not attend the other.

From the Mishnah which allows the Kohen Gadol to wear personal clothing, we may infer that Keri'as ha'Torah is not an Avodah.

From the Mishnah which permits him to wear the Bigdei Lavan we may infer that it is permitted to derive benefit from the Bigdei Kehunah.

Question: Perhaps the Keri'ah is a Tzorech Avodah (but general benefit may not be derived from Bigdei Kehunah) given that deriving benefit from Bigdei Kehunah is a subject of investigation?

Answer: The Mishnah in Tamid (that Kohanim are only restricted regarding sleeping but may eat in their Begadim) was invoked to prove that they may derive benefit from them.

Perhaps there, too, the eating is a Tzorech Avodah and may not generalize to all forms of benefit.

The Beraisa teaches that the owners get Kaparah when the Kohanim eat their Chata'os and Ashamos.

This lends support to referring to their eating as a Tzorech Avodah, even if it is not, itself, an Avodah.

The Mishnah in Tamid (by restricting sleeping) seems to imply that walking about in the Bigdei Kehunah is permitted.

In fact such strolling is not permitted.

Question: Why, then, did the Mishnah single out sleeping as being impermissible?

Answer: The reference to sleeping is necessitated by the Seifah which permits them to fold up their garments and place them under their heads whilst they slept.