Ephod – Appearance/2

Ephod – Appearance

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Apron

The Ephod was similar to an apron, extending in the back from the priest's hips to his heels.  A band at the top of the Ephod (חֵשֶׁב הָאֵפוֹד) served as a belt, while two shoulder straps (כִּתְפֹת הָאֵפֹד) reached from the back, over the priest's shoulders, connecting to the Breast-plate in front.

Sources:RashiShemot 28:4-7Zevachim 18bZevachim 19aAbout R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, perhaps RambamHilkhot Kelei HaMikdash 9:9-11About R. Moshe b. Maimon,¹ perhaps Seforno2Shemot 28:6About R. Ovadyah Seforno²

Meaning of  "אֵפֹד" – Rashi is not explicit, but appears to understand the root "אפד" to mean to adorn or decorate, writing, "והאפוד שם תכשיט" and later, "הוא קרוי אפוד, על שם שאופדו ומקשטו". According to him, then, the אפוד was predominantly an ornamental garment, serving a decorative purpose.

"וַיִּתֵּן עָלָיו אֶת הָאֵפֹד וַיַּחְגֹּר אֹתוֹ בְּחֵשֶׁב" – Rashi learns from this verse (Vayikra 8:7) that the חֵשֶׁב and the אֵפֹד were two distinct parts of one article of clothing, serving different functions.  Only the חֵשֶׁב was a belt (וַיַּחְגֹּר אֹתוֹ), while the Ephod was a full garment that could be "put on" (וַיִּתֵּן עָלָיו). The relationship between the two is much like that between the "כֻּתֹּנֶת" and "אַבְנֵט" mentioned in the first half of the verse.  The "אַבְנֵט" served to belt (וַיַּחְגֹּר) the כֻּתֹּנֶת, a robe that is  worn (וַיִּתֵּן עָלָיו).

"אֶל שְׁנֵי קְצוֹתָיו" – Rashi learns from this phrase that the main part of the Ephod covered only the priest's back and was rectangular in shape, for otherwise it could not be said to have "edges". [Had it encircled the priest like a skirt, it would be difficult to pinpoint the "end" at which the כְתֵפֹת were to be joined.]

Length of the Ephod – Rashi does not bring any textual support from Shemot for his position that the Ephod extended only from the waist and below. However, he points to Yechezkel 44:18, "לֹא יַחְגְּרוּ בַּיָּזַע" which is understood by Bavli Zevachim 18b to teach that one may not gird one's self in a place where one sweats, ie. not below the hips, nor above the elbows, but rather at the level of the elbows. As such, he suggests that the חשב must have been belted at the waist and the apron lay below.

"שְׁתֵּי כְתֵפֹת חֹבְרֹת יִהְיֶה" vs. "וְחֻבָּר" – According to Rashi both phrases refer to one and the same joining, the attachment of the shoulder straps to the Ephod.³  The verse teaches that in contrast to the חשב which was made as one piece with the Ephod, the shoulder straps were made individually and only then sewn to the Ephod. Rashi would likely suggest that he doubling is meant only for elaboration and not significant.

"כִתְפוֹת הָאֵפוֹד" – Rashi understands these to refer to two long straps, extending from the top of the apron, up the priest's back and slightly over his shoulders (כתפות) where they attached to and held the breastplate. Rashbam questions how they would not have fallen off when the priest was engaged in his work. Rashi replies that the fact that the straps were wide and attached to the breast-plate wighed them down and ensured that they would not fall.⁴

"לִהְיוֹת עַל חֵשֶׁב הָאֵפוֹד" – This phrase is somewhat difficult for this approach as it suggests that the breast-plate lay on the חשב itself (rather than the מעיל as this approach implies). Rashi explains that the verse means only that the bottom of the breast-plate was tightly attached to the חשב, with perhaps the edges overlapping.⁵

"חָגוּר אֵפוֹד" vs. "נֹשֵׂא אֵפוֹד" – The choice of verb, "" is logical for this position, as the Ephod was belted around the priest. The language of "" however is less easily understood, as it is not clear what is being carried. This leads Rashi to suggest that the phrase refers not to the Ephod itself, but to the breast-plate and Urrim and Tummim which rested in its middle.

Heavy – Chizkuni brings those who question this approach on practical grounds, claiming that if the garment was woven with 28 threads and hung on the bottom, it would be extremely cumbersome for the priest as he worked.

Vest or Tunic

The Ephod covered only the upper body of the priest, resembling a vest or corsette, or perhaps a tunic.

Sources:JosephusAntiquities of the Jews 3:7:5About Josephus, R. SaadiaSiddurAbout R. Saadia Gaon, commentary attributed to RashiDivrei HaYamim I 15:27About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, perhaps RambamHilkhot Kelei HaMikdash 9:9-11About R. Moshe b. Maimon,⁶ perhaps R. Avraham b. HaRambamShemot 28:6-7Shemot 28:26-28About R. Avraham Maimonides,⁷ opinion brought by ChizkuniShemot 28:6-8Shemot 28:27About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach, Meiri, perhaps RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 28:8Shemot Toalot 28:2About R. Levi b. Gershom,⁸ perhaps AbarbanelShemot 28:6About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel,⁹ R. S.R. HirschShemot 28:4Shemot 28:8About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch

Meaning of "אֵפֹד"

Meaning of "חשב"

"וַיִּתֵּן עָלָיו אֶת הָאֵפֹד וַיַּחְגֹּר אֹתוֹ בְּחֵשֶׁב"

"כִתְפוֹת הָאֵפוֹד"

Skirt and Top

The Ephod wrapped around the priest's waist like a skirt while the "ketefot" covered his entire back.

Sources:RashbamShemot 28:7About R. Shemuel b. Meir,

Cape

Sources:perhaps Rambam, perhaps RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 28:8Shemot Toalot 28:2About R. Levi b. Gershom,¹⁰ R. Meyuchas

¹ See R. HIrsch who understands Rambam in this manner.  Rambam's words, though,  are ambiguous and can be understood in multiple ways.  This depends largely on how one understands two key terms used in his description of the length of the Ephod, "מִכְּנֶגֶד אַצִּילֵי הַיָּדַיִם" and "עַד הָרַגְלַיִם".  The former might refer to either the armpit or the elbow and the latter might refer to either the top or bottom of the legs. As such, Rambam might be envisioning a garment that extends from the armpits to the hips, from the elbow (or hip area), to the ankles, or from the armpits all the way to the ankles. Rambam's description of חשב האפוד is similarly ambiguous. He writes, "וְיֵשׁ לוֹ כְּמוֹ שְׁתֵּי יָדוֹת יוֹצְאוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ בָּאָרִיג לְכָאן וּלְכָאן", but it is not clear if he thinks these "ידות" are like straps or wider pieces of cloth.

² Seforno's description is very brief, and shares only that the Ephod was a garment that went form a person's hips and down. He does not say explicitly that it was worn only in the back, so it is also possible that he viewed it as skirt-like rather than an apron.

³ Cf. Rashbam below who disagrees.

⁴ As the breast-plate was further attached at its bottom to the חשב, this would also help prevent the straps from falling.

⁵ He could also read the verse as if written "אל חשב האפוד".

⁶ See the note above that Rambam's words are somewhat ambiguous and allow for more than one understanding. See, though, R"Y Ariel, "האפוד - סינר או מעיל?", Ma'alin BaKodesh (2003): 11-42, who attempts to prove both that Rambam viewed the Ephod as a tunic rather than an apron, and that this description of the Ephod best matches the verses.

⁷ R. Avraham b. HaRambam's description of the Ephod is also somewhat ambiguous.  Though he says explicitly that it extended from the shoulders, it is unclear until where he thinks it reached, writing, "עד הרגלים" which might be either the top of the leg (just below the hips) or the bottom (the heel). R"Y Ariel (see the article cited above) attempts to prove that R. . Avraham b. HaRambam means the former from the fact that he prefaces his comments by stating, "האפוד מטלית מרובעת", understanding this to mean that the Ephod was a square (and thus shorter).  It is possible, though, that R. Avraham b. HaRambam simply means that the Ephod was a quadrilateral, allowing for the possibility that it extended to the floor.

⁸ As with Rambam's description, Ralbag's words are ambiguous: "והיה לאחוריו מתחת השחי עד הרגלים".  Though it is explicit that the garment covered the priest's back from the armpits, it is not clear how far down it extended.  Do the words "עד הרגלים" refer to the top or bottom of the legs (i.e. to the hip or ankles)?

⁹ Abarbanel says that the Ephod hung on the priest's back, from under the shoulders, near the armpits, but he does not say until where it extended, making it unclear whether he envisioned it as a short vest-like garment or a long cloak.

¹⁰ As with Rambam's description, Ralbag's words are ambiguous: "והיה לאחוריו מתחת השחי עד הרגלים".  Though it is explicit that the garment covered the preist's back from the armpits, it is ot clear how far down it extended.  Do the words "עד הרגלים" refer to the top or bottom of the legs (ie. to the hip or ankles)?