(Beraisa): All of the Avodos listed in the Pesukim are in order excepting the retrieving of the Kaf u'Machtah.

Question: Why do we assume this is out of sequence?

Answer (R. Chisda): If it were in sequence, we would not have five Tevilos and 10 Kidushin as is our tradition (since he would remain in the Bigdei Lavan to retrieve the Kaf u'Machtah).

Question (R. Zeira): Perhaps there was (an unwritten) interruption, the outer-Sa'ir (Chatas ha'Kipurim), and the Pesukim remain in order?

Answer (Abaye): The Pasuk "ve'Yatza ve'Asa" teaches that the Ailim (in Bigdei Zahav) follow directly on his (first) emergence from the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim.

Answer (Rava): The Pesukim are not in sequence since "Asher Lavash" indicates that he changes back into Bigdei Lavan which he wore previously, (and changed out of for an earlier outside-Avodah).

Question (Rabah b'R. Shila): Perhaps the interruption was the outer Sa'ir and the Pesukim remain in order?

Answer (Rava): The Pasuk "ve'Yatza ve'Asa" teaches that the Ailim (in Bigdei Zahav) follow directly on his (first) emergence from the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim.

Question: But this is not the only part of the Pesukim which are out of order!?

The Pesukim have the Eimurei Chatas offered before the Sereifas Par/Sa'ir.

The Mishnah has the Sereifas Par/Sa'ir earlier (coinciding with the Keri'as ha'Torah) and the Eimurei Chatas after!?

Answer: The Beraisa means that from Kaf u'Machtah onward the Pesukim are out of order.

Question: Why assume that the Pesukim are out of order when we can assume that the Mishnah is out of order!?

Answer (Abaye): The Pasuk uses the term "ve'ha'Mishale'ach" to echo back to its earlier position (ie he sent it out before the Eimurei Chatas even though it is written after) so, too, the word "ve'ha'Soref" positions the Sereifah earlier (before the Eimurim), even though it is written after.

Question: Perhaps this connection teaches the opposite that both are done after the Eimurim!?

Answer (Abaye): "ve'ha'Meshale'ach" (where the Pasuk could have said 've'Shilach') echoes back to an already known Meshaleach.

Answer (Rava): The Shiluach could not have been later (after the Eimurim and out of Pasuk-sequence) since the Sa'ir only needs to remain alive for the Matan Damim within ("Yo'omad Chai"), not longer (as for the Eimurei Chatas).

The usher returns to Yerushalayim and reports back to the Kohen Gadol.

If he finds the Kohen Gadol in a public place, he honors him by saying that he executed his mission.

If he finds him in private, he honors Hash-m by proclaiming that he fulfilled the mission of the One Who sustains the living.

(Rabah): When Talmidei Chachamim would take leave from one another they would say, 'May the Sustainer of the living grant you long, good, upstanding years'.

(R. Yehudah): The 'Land of the Living' refers to the marketplaces (where people find their provisions.

'Years of Life' refer to years in which a person's fortune turns to the good, and he feels newly alive.

'Aleichem Ishim Ekra' refers to scholars who appear weak yet accomplish acts of great valor ('Eizehu Gibor... ' - Maharsha).

It also teaches that one who wishes to merit offering libations on the Mizbe'ach should provide wine for scholars.

If one sees Torah ceasing from his offspring, he should marry the daughter of a scholar (proof text from Iyov).

In the reported incident, a Kohen Gadol's pride was hurt when the people turned to follow Sh'maya and Avtalyon.

When Sh'maya and Avtalyon took their leave of the Kohen Gadol, the latter referred to them derogatorily (making reference to their non-Jewish ancestry).

They rebuked the Kohen Gadol for not following in the peace- loving steps of his ancestor, Aharon ha'Kohen (and transgressing Ona'as Devarim).

The Kohen Gadol served in eight garments (those listed for a Kohen Hedyot as well as the Choshen, Eifod, Me'il and Tzitz) while a Kohen Hedyot served in four (Kesones, Michnasayim, Mitznefes and Avnet).

Only when wearing his eight garments may the Urim ve'Tumim be consulted, and then only on behalf of the King, Av Beis Din and him whom the Tzibur requires.

Where the word "Sheish" is used, the threads of each material are made six-ply while the word "Mashzar" implies eight-ply threads, Paroches-24 ply, and Choshen/Eifod-28 ply.

Question: What is the source for six-ply threads?

Answer: It is implied by one of the five references to linen (the word "Sheish" four times plus the word "Bad") in the Pasuk.

Question: How do we know that "Sheish" means linen?

Answer (R. Yosi b'R. Chanina): Since "Bad" (which appears alongside "Sheish" in the Pasuk- Tofsos Yeshanim) implies that which emerges from the ground alone (as the linen derives from the stalk, not from its leaves).

Question: Perhaps this refers to the wool-thread?

Answer: Wool splits, unlike Pishtan.

Question: But Pishtan also splits when processed?

Answer: Pishtan only splits under the pressure of its process, whereas wool is inherently stranded.

Answer (Ravina): The Pasuk in Yechezkel teaches us that the garments (referred to in the Pesukim as "Sheish") are Pishtan.

Question: How did we know that before Yechezkel?

Answer: It was a tradition handed down from Moshe and only recorded by Yechezkel.

If not, then how can we understand the statement (of R. Chisda regarding the prohibition of a Kohen Areil not serving) that it is known from Yechezkel (and not from the Torah)?

That surely must have been an existing tradition.

Question: How do we know that "Mashzar" means eight-ply?

Answer: We link the word "Mashzar" to the Paroches where the 24 threads were comprised of four materials, each of six- ply, so, too, the Rimonim were 24, three materials of each of eight-ply.

Question: Link it rather to the Choshen/Eifod which is 28 threads?

Answer: It is more logical to link those items which do not contain gold (than to introduce the Choshen/Eifod which does).

Question: To the contrary, link garments (the Rimon to the Choshen/Eifod) and do not introduce that which is not a garment (the Paroches)?!

Answer: Rather, we link the Rimon to the Avnet (which is a garment and gold is absent).

Answer (R. Mari): The word "Ta'asenu" is meant to make the Choshen unique an no other garments will have 28 threads.

Answer (R. Ashi): The word "ve'Asisa" teaches that each of the materials must have an equal number of threads, which is not possible if we link to Choshen (28 divided by three).