In Exodus 28, we learn about the high priest’s head gear, including a golden frontplate inscribed with the words kodesh l’Adonai, holy to the Lord. The frontplate wasn’t just adornment, it was functional. The Torah explains: “It shall be on Aaron’s forehead, that Aaron may take away any sin arising from the holy things that the Israelites consecrate, from any of their sacred donations; it shall be on his forehead at all times, to win acceptance for them before God.” (Exodus 28:38)
It’s clear from the Torah that the frontplate was able to correct problems with Israelite sacrifices — or, in the language of the Torah, remove sin. On today’s daf, we encounter a mishnah that specifies precisely which sacrificial problems the frontplate can correct.
If the handful (of a meal offering) became ritually impure and the priest nonetheless sacrificed it, the frontplate worn by the high priest affects acceptance. If the handful left its designated area and the priest nonetheless sacrificed it, the frontplate does not affect acceptance. The reason is that the frontplate affects acceptance for offerings sacrificed when ritually impure and does not affect acceptance for offerings that leave their designated areas.
According to the Mishnah, if the priest sacrificed a handful of meal offering that became impure, the frontplate corrects for it. But if the priest sacrificed a handful of meal offering that had left its designated area of the Temple, it doesn’t. How do the rabbis know this? That’s the first question the Gemara addresses.
The sages taught in a beraita: It is written: “And it shall be upon Aaron’s forehead, and Aaron shall bear the sin committed with the sacred items …” (Exodus 28:38) Which sin does he bear? If you say he atones for the sin of piggul, it is already stated: “It shall not be credited to him.” (Leviticus 7:18) If you say he atones for the sin of notar, it is already stated in the same verse: “It shall not be accepted.” Therefore, the frontplate bears only the sin of impurity, as its general prohibition was permitted in community.
This beraita is making a textual argument. Because the Torah specifies that the sins of piggul and notar render a sacrifice illegitimate, clearly the priest’s headgear had no corrective effect on them. Therefore, the Mishnah must be referring to a different sacrificial problem, specifically a case where some portion of the meal offering became ritually impure. Since impure sacrifices are allowed in certain circumstances — namely, when the entire community is in a situation of impurity — the frontplate can render such sacrifices permitted even when the community is not impure.
But as Rabbi Zeira next points out, this doesn’t really explain the mishnah, which says that the frontplate doesn’t correct for a sacrifice that leaves the Temple grounds. Such sacrifices are also allowed in certain circumstances, as they were when the Israelites sacrificed on private altars after entering the promised land but before the establishment of a sacrificial center. (We learned about this back in Zevachim.) Why then doesn’t the frontplate correct for those sacrifices too?
Once again, the answer is textual, this time brought by Abaye:
Abaye said to him: The verse states with regard to the frontplate: “And it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before the Lord” (Exodus 28:38), teaching that in the case of a sin whose general prohibition is permitted before the Lord (i.e., in the Temple), yes, the frontplate atones for it. But in the case of the sin of offerings that leave the courtyard, the frontplate does not atone for it.
The key phrase in Leviticus is “before the Lord.” According to Abaye, this teaches that the frontplate only corrects for sacrificial problems (that may not be problems in certain instances) when they are performed before God — that is, in the Temple.
As with all things related to the sacrificial system, we no longer have a priestly frontplate to correct for ritual infractions. But there is another piece of Jewish headgear worn at the forehead that the rabbis considered analogous — tefillin. Indeed, in a passage in Tractate Shabbat, the rabbis use the priestly frontplate to derive a law about whether one can wear tefillin at nightfall on Friday. The frontplate made its wearer constantly mindful of God, even though it only had God’s name inscribed on it once. All the more so tefillin, which contain God’s name multiple times, will ensure constant divine awareness and thus protect against a person mindlessly removing their tefillin in public and running afoul of the prohibition on carrying them in the public domain on Shabbat. Tefillin may not effect atonement for the wearer like the frontplate did, but in its own way may be even more potent.
Read all of Menachot 25 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on February 5, 2026. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.
