וּמָה הֵן מוֹצִיאִין אַחַת אוֹ שְׁתַּיִם וְאֵין מוֹצִיאִין אֲגֻדָּל בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ
And what fingers do [the priests] bring out [for the lottery]? One or two [fingers], and they do not bring out a thumb in the Temple.
In the first chapter of Mishnah Yoma, we learned all about how the High Priest is prepared for the special duties of Yom Kippur. Our text got him all the way up to the moment of clearing the ashes from the altar in order to make new sacrifices. And now, in the second chapter, in order to put that action in context, we’re granted a diversion into what the practice of clearing ashes was like on a normal day in the Temple. At first, anyone who wanted to just did it; but when there were many priests all vying to clean, they raced! And if the race ended in a tie, a specially appointed priest would have them stick out one or two fingers—but not the thumb! Why? Well, the Gemara (Yoma 22b) suggests that they were doing a sort of counting-off game, ala Bubblegum Bubblegum In A Dish, where the chosen kohen has a number in mind and is going around the circle counting that many fingers. And we’re counting fingers instead of individual Jews because prohibition/taboo against direct numbering of Jews.
So what’s with not sticking out the thumb אֲגֻדָּל? First off, I had guessed that the one or two fingers thing was about trying to manipulate the odds, but the Gemara on Yoma 23a claims that it is an accounting for people who have trouble sticking out only one finger and such have to lift two in order to even lift one. They say it is the thumb which is the concern for cheaters / הָרַמָּאִים! An ash-hungry priest might see the count coming toward them and try to hold out their thumb in just such a way that it looks like it’s their neighbour’s and thus be counted twice. And if they got caught, they’d get a punishment of lashes!! In our Mishnah Collective Teachers Meeting, where we prep the upcoming texts, we were reminded of how priests are anointed, with blood on their ear, thumb, and big toe. We wondered if the thumb had too special a significance to be used in what felt like a childish game.
For language nerds, I’d like to stick out my אֲגֻדָּל / ah’goo’dahl / thumb, and hitchhike my way through the dictionaries. First stop is page 11 where Jastrow says simply that it means “thumb”, and “גּוּדָל” on 218 is “thumb, great toe.” The root here is naturally גדל meaning “to grow, be large,” and a Jastrow Journeyer may find other nouns with the same root, meaning “greatness, pile” or other big stuff. So what’s with these two thumbs, where the main difference is an aleph at the beginning? The Klein Etymology Dictionary taught me that these are called “collateral forms,” which wiktionary says is, “A synonymous but not identical, coexisting form (variation) of a word, such as an accepted alternative spelling.” We actually had one a few sessions ago in Mishnah Yoma 1:8 with the word מֵאַשְׁמוּרָה—where אַשְׁמוֹרָה (night-watch) is a collateral form with מִשְׁמָר (guard/watch). For anyone who wants to get mega grammar nerdy tonight, check out this Etymonline search for the word “collateral” which comes up with 5 pages worth of entries that discuss collateral forms in English and what’s become of them! As the old saying goes: Who’s got two thumbs and a whole list of collateral noun forms?!
As we build this scene, I’m of two minds on what the Mishnah Sages wanted me to take from it. Some learners today felt like this narrative was intended to humanize the Priests—showing that they too played games and had personal zeal for making chores sacred. As if to say, the Kohanim aren’t some holier than thou crew, they’re really just like us. The other mind I have is that they included this story to say something like “the priests are not like us!” Highlighting how the priests would play games and even try to cheat in order to perform holy ritual, thus slandering or mocking the whole priesthood—and further strengthening their own claim toward power in the centuries after the destruction of the temple. What does it say about me that I’m so used to the latter being a clearer intention that the former humanizing read didn’t even occur to me? I’m glad we learn in chevruta!