The Myth of the High Priest’s Rope

Introduction

Often, ancient Jewish texts shed light on difficult passages in much the same way that archeological discoveries help us better understand the ancient world of Scripture. Unfortunately, like the Scriptures themselves, these ancient sources can also be misused.

Almost everyone has heard the explanation that when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), he wore a rope around his waist or ankle. In this way, he could be removed if he was struck dead for his sinfulness and the bells he wore stopped jingling.

One easy question we all need to learn to ask at this point is, "What is the source of that material?" The truth is that this is a widespread legend, often repeated in sermons and teachings , but scholars widely regard it as a myth originating in the Middle Ages.

Origin of the Legend

The earliest references appear in the Zohar, a 13th-century AD medieval mystical text attributed to Kabbalah that originated in Spain. It also teaches gnosticism, theosophy, mysticism, reincarnation, numerology, and astrology. It is not a source that any version of Judaism has ever used to determine belief or practice and is rejected as a source for historical reconstruction by Jewish scholars and religious leaders.

One version of the story is found in Emor 102a:

Note the modern changes to the story: rope versus chain, ankle/waist versus feet, no longer hearing bells tinkle versus the crimson strap. Note also that it teaches that if a Day of Atonement ritual is not carried out successfully, God cannot hear the prayers of his people. So since the Day of Atonement ritual has not been carried out properly since the destruction of the temple in AD 70, this would mean that God has heard no prayers since AD 70!

Another version of the story appears in Acharei Mot 67a:

Here, the Zohar appears self-contradictory: chain versus rope, feet versus leg, crimson strap versus no mention of the crimson strap.

Key Evidence Against the Practice

Truly ancient Jewish texts demonstrate that the Zohar's story would create a problem known as chatsitsah: since Scripture decrees what the High Priest must wear into the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur (Leviticus 16:3-4, 32, etc.) – simple white linen garments (tunic, pants, sash, and turban). Any addition to his vestments would constitute disobedience to the divine command as no extra items are permitted.

The High Priest wore golden bells on the hem of his blue robe only during regular service in the Holy Place, (Exodus 28:31-35), where the sound was required “so that he will not die” when entering and exiting before the Lord. On Yom Kippur, the High Priest did not wear the golden garments with bells, so there was no jingling to listen for.

There are also practical issues with the story. The thick, overlapping curtains/veil in the Temple would make dragging a body impractical. Additionally, if a High Priest died inside, another priest could retrieve the body for purification purposes (as allowed in certain cases).

Only one rabbinic text describes the death of a High Priest in the Holy of Holies (Babylonian Talmud Yoma 19b). Much later sources such as Maimonides, Rashi, and the author of Aruch HaShulchan indeed state that "many" High Priests died in the Holy of Holies, but they do not mention a rope and they date to medieval times and later. Another story describes a High Priest who delayed in prayer for so long that his colleagues became worried, entered the Holy of Holies, and escorted him out (Yoma 53b). Neither of these stories mentions a rope or chain used to extract the High Priest.

Summary

The myth of the bells as a life monitor plus a rope used to drag out a dead priest is often shared to illustrate God’s holiness and the danger of unworthy approach, but it is not factual. The biblical account in Leviticus 16 emphasizes ritual purity, atonement, and precise obedience without these dramatic additions.

Such "insider knowledge" is discouraging because it suggests that only "special" people can really understand Scripture. Trying to add interest or excitement to the Scriptures is also dangerous because it sends the message that the Bible is not sufficient "to equip [us] for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:15, 17).

If we change and supplement the Scriptures to serve our needs, then we quickly become relativistic and postmodern. In addition, this is the approach to the Bible taken by pseudo-Christian cults. We certainly do not want to desensitize ourselves by adopting their practices, thus setting ourselves up to accept their false messages. These paths ultimately lead to our acceptance of the "word of man" in place of the "Word of God." One is the truth, which sets us free; the other eventually leads to hurt and bondage. Context and background indeed enable our understanding of the Scriptures, and ancient sources are important in this process. However, as with the Scriptures themselves, honesty and sensitivity must be exercised to use them properly!