Parallel
שבועות 10
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
Thus the festival goats are equated with the New Moon goats; just as the New Moon goats atone for something connected with holy things, so the festival goats atone for something connected with holy things. And if you should say, let them [the festival goats] atone for that for which the New Moon goat atones, [we would reply. No! for] we have said: it [hath He given to you to bear the iniquity] — it [the New Moon goat] bears the iniquity, and no other bears the iniquity. And if you should say, let them atone for that for which the Day of Atonement [outer] goat atones, [we would reply. No! for] we have said: once in the year [shall he make atonement for it] — this atonement [of the Day of Atonement outer goat] shall be only once a year. For what, then, do they [the festival goats] atone? If for a case where there is knowledge at the beginning and at the end, the transgressor must bring a [sliding scale] sacrifice? If for a case where there is knowledge at the beginning and not at the end, this is a case where the inner goat and the Day of Atonement hold the sin in suspense? If for a case where there is no knowledge at the beginning but at the end, for this the outer goat and the Day of Atonement atone? Of necessity, therefore, they [the festival goats] atone for a case where there is no knowledge either at the beginning or at the end. R. MEIR SAYS ALL THE GOATS HAVE EQUAL POWERS OF ATONEMENT, etc. Said R. Hama b. Hanina: what is R. Meir's reason? — The text [could have] said: ‘one goat’, [but it says:] ‘and one goat’ — all the goats are thus equated with each other: the conjunction and adds to the preceding subject. It was at first assumed that each deduced [its additional powers of atonement] from its neighbour; [but that cannot be, for] R. Johanan said: In the whole Torah a law may be deduced by analogy from another law which has itself been deduced by analogy, except in the case of holy things, where a law may not be deduced by analogy from another law which has itself been deduced by analogy. — This need cause no difficulty: they may all deduce from the first. Granted, in every case where the text has ‘and one goat’, but in the case of Pentecost and the Day of Atonement where the text has not ‘and one goat’, how can we deduce [their laws]? — Well then, said R. Jonah, the verse says: ‘These ye shall offer unto the Lord in your festivals’ — all the festivals are equated with each other. But the New Moon is not a festival! Verily, the New Moon is also called a festival, as Abaye said [elsewhere], — for Abaye said Tammuz of that year they made a full month [of thirty days], as it is written: He hath called a solemn assembly [or, festival] against me to crush my young men. R. Johanan said: R. Meir agrees that the goat offered within [the veil on the Day of Atonement] does not atone their atonements, nor do they atone his atonement. He does not atone their atonements: he atones one atonement, and does not atone two atonements; they do not atone his atonement, for the verse says: once in the year [shall he make atonement] — this atonement shall be only once in the year. It was likewise taught [in a Baraitha]: For a case where there is no knowledge either at the beginning or at the end, and for a case where there is no knowledge at the beginning but knowledge at the end, and for a clean man who ate unclean holy food, the festival goats and the New Moon goats and the goat offered outside [the veil on the Day of Atonement] bring atonement: this is the opinion of R. Meir. The inner goat, however, he leaves out, and that they [the others] atone [his atonement] he also leaves out. NOW, R. SIMEON SAYS THE NEW MOON GOATS ATONE FOR A CLEAN MAN WHO ATE UNCLEAN HOLY FOOD, etc. Granted that the New Moon goats do not atone for that for which the festival goats atone, because the text says: [It hath He given you to bear] the iniquity — one iniquity it bears, but it does not bear two iniquities; but let the festival goats atone for that for which the New Moon goats atone? — [No!] The text says: it [hath He given you to bear the iniquity] — it bears the iniquity, but no other bears the iniquity. Granted that the festival goats do not atone for that for which the Day of Atonement goat atones, because the text says: once in the year [shall he make atonement] — this atonement shall be only once a year; but let the Day of Atonement goat atone for that for which the festival goats atone? [No!] The text says: [And Aaron shall make atonement upon the horns of it] once — one atonement it atones, but it does not atone two atonements. But once is written in connection with the inner goat [and not the outer]! — The text says: [One goat for a sin offering,] beside
—
the sin offering of atonement — hence the outer is equated with the inner. R. SIMEON B. JUDAH SAID IN HIS [R. SIMEON B. YOHAI'S] NAME: [THE NEW MOON GOATS ATONE FOR A CLEAN MAN WHO ATE UNCLEAN HOLY FOOD; THE FESTIVAL GOATS, IN ADDITION TO ATONING FOR A CLEAN MAN WHO ATE UNCLEAN HOLY FOOD, ATONE ALSO FOR A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO KNOWLEDGE EITHER AT THE BEGINNING OR AT THE END; THE OUTER GOAT OF THE DAY OF ATONEMENT, IN ADDITION TO ATONING FOR A CLEAN MAN WHO ATE UNCLEAN HOLY FOOD, AND FOR A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO KNOWLEDGE EITHER AT THE BEGINNING OR AT THE END, ATONES ALSO FOR A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO KNOWLEDGE AT THE BEGINNING BUT THERE WAS KNOWLEDGE AT THE END.] What is the difference: the New Moon goats do not atone for that for which the festival goats atone because the text says: [it hath He given you to bear] the iniquity — one iniquity it bears, but it does not bear two iniquities; then let the festival goats also not atone for that for which the New Moon goats atone, because the text says: it [hath He given you to bear the iniquity] — it bears the iniquity, but no other bears the iniquity? — Because [the emphasis on] it does not seem justified to him. What is the difference: the festival goats do not atone for that for which the Day of Atonement goat atones, because the text says: once in the year [shall he make atonement] — this atonement [of the Day of Atonement goat] shall be only once a year; then let the Day of Atonement goat also not atone for that for which the festival goats atone, because it is written: [And Aaron shall make atonement upon the horns of it] once — one atonement it atones, but it does not atone two atonements? [The emphasis on] once does not seem justified to him. Why? — For it is written in connection with the inner goat [and not the outer]. If so, let the festival goats also atone for that for which the Day of Atonement goat atones, because once [in the year] is written in connection with the inner goat [and not the outer]. In reality, [the emphasis on] once does seem justified to him, but here it is different, for the text says: And Aaron shall make atonement upon the horns of it once in the year — the horns, namely, of the inner altar: with reference to this [we say that] it atones one atonement and not two atonements, but with reference to the outer [we may say] it atones even two atonements. Ulla said that R. Johanan said: The regular offerings which are not required for the community are redeemed unblemished. Rabbah sat and stated this law. Said R. Hisda to him: Who heeds you and R. Johanan, your teacher! Whither has the holiness in them departed! He replied to him: Do you not hold that we do not say, ‘whither has the holiness in them departed’? For we learnt in a Mishnah: The remainder of the incense — what was done with it? The wages of the workmen were allocated [from the Temple treasury], and the extra incense was exchanged for this money, and given to the workmen as their wages, and was then re-bought [from them] with the new donations. Now why [should this procedure be permitted]? Let us say, ‘whither has the holiness in them departed’? — He said to him: You argue from incense! Incense is different,
—