Keritot 25b — the Talmud in English

Rabbi Hanina taught before Rava: ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location")

a suspensive guilt-offering comes for

the uncertainty of eating

the carcass,

even though there is no karet for its eating, but rather a prohibition of “You shall not.”

He said to him,

Rava:

But did we not learn

in our Mishna:

“And the Sages say: He brings a suspensive guilt-offering only for a matter whose intentional violation is punishable by karet and whose unwitting violation requires a sin-offering! And if

it is

according to Rabbi Eliezer,

even

as a voluntary offering it also comes!”

He said to him,

Rabbi Hanina:

Why did you not study

Mishnayot and beraitot? Then you would know as I do. For I

many times

many times

taught it

this beraita, that a suspensive guilt-offering comes for eating an uncertain carcass,

before my master—and who is he?

“my master”—

Rabba.

And he said to me: This

beraita

is according to whom? It is Rabbi Eliezer, for the Sages said to him:

that we require at least an uncertainty of any prohibition, so that he can bring a suspensive guilt-offering for it.

For we learned: Rather, they say to him—

wait

before bringing it

until you enter the realm of uncertainty.

Rava said: What is the reason for what they said to him

thus?

The verse says: [Leviticus 4]

«

“that may not be done

(unwittingly), and he bears guilt.” 34 .

Rava said: What is the reason of the Rabbis, who say: One brings a suspensive guilt-offering only for a matter whose intentional violation is punishable by karet and whose unwitting violation requires a sin-offering?

Because

they derive

by a gzera shava

“commandments, commandments”

from a sin-offering for forbidden fat.

Just as there

it is a matter

whose intentional violation is punishable by karet and whose unwitting violation requires a sin-offering, so here

with a suspensive guilt-offering, one brings it only for uncertainty concerning

a matter whose intentional violation is punishable by karet and whose unwitting violation requires a sin-offering.

The Sages taught: Five definite guilt-offerings

and

atone,

but

a suspensive guilt-offering does not effect complete atonement.

We raised it:

What is he saying?

Rav Yosef said: This is what he is saying: Five guilt-offerings effect complete atonement, but a suspensive guilt-offering does not effect complete atonement,

for when it subsequently becomes known to him that he sinned, he still needs to attain atonement through a sin-offering.

And it is not according to Rabbi Eliezer, who says: A suspensive guilt-offering comes for

uncertain eating of

the carcass,

and there his atonement is complete, for even when it becomes known to him with certainty that he ate a carcass, he does not bring an additional offering for his atonement.

Ravina said: This is what it teaches: The five guilt-offerings have no

matter

other than them that effects their atonement, for when it becomes known to him, he brings

a guilt-offering in every circumstance, even if Yom Kippur passed over him before he became aware of his obligation. Whereas

a suspensive guilt-offering,

we find that also another

matter effects its atonement, for

also

when it becomes known to him, he does not bring

an offering.

As we learned: Those liable for sin-offerings and definite guilt-offerings, over whom Yom Kippur passed—

are obligated to bring

their offering also

after Yom Kippur,

because Yom Kippur does not atone for those liable for sin-offerings and guilt-offerings. But

those liable for suspensive guilt-offerings

over whom Yom Kippur passed—

are exempt

because the atonement of the day benefited them.

We learned in the Mishna:

“Those liable for sin-offerings and definite guilt-offerings.”

It teaches: Those liable for sin-offerings and definite guilt-offerings, over whom Yom Kippur passed—

are obligated to bring after Yom Kippur.

Those liable for suspensive guilt-offerings—

are exempt.

We raised it:

From where are these matters

that Yom Kippur does not atone for sin-offerings and definite guilt-offerings?

When Rav Dimi came, he said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Hanina said: The verse says: [Leviticus 16]

[Ваикра, глава 16] «

“And he shall atone for the Sanctuary from the impurities of the children of Israel and from their rebellious sins, for all their sins.”

It is written

“sins” analogous to “rebellious sins,”

to teach us:

Just as rebellious sins

—

which are not subject to an offering—

Yom Kippur atones for them,

so too sins

such as when it did not become known to him in the end that he sinned,

which are not subject to an offering, it atones.

But sins

that are

subject to an offering, it does not atone for.

Abaye said to him: But when this verse is written, from which you learned that it does not atone for sins that are subject to an offering—

from which you derived that Yom Kippur does not effect atonement for sins that are subject to an offering, it

it is written concerning the goat performed inside, for it does not atone

the inner goat

for transgressions concerning a known commandment,

that is, when it has already become known to him that he became impure and sinned by entering the Temple in a state of impurity, but only for those whose impurity was concealed from them when they entered the Temple and who still do not remember their sin.

But the dispatched goat,

whose atonement is stronger,

atones

even

for transgressions concerning a known commandment; say to me: It even atones for sins that are subject to an offering

also

?!

Rather, Abaye said: From here,

as it is written concerning the dispatched goat: [Leviticus 16]

“And he shall confess over it

[

all the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their rebellious sins, for all their sins”—

“sins” analogous to “rebellious sins.”

Just as rebellious sins, which are not subject to an offering, are atoned for, so too sins that are not subject to an offering are atoned for; but sins that are subject to an offering are not atoned for, and the verse excluded them with regard to the dispatched goat.

To say

from here

, that for sins that are subject to an offering

the dispatched goat does not atone.

Rav Dimi said to him: From where do you know that these

“rebellious sins”

are not subject to an offering? Perhaps these are those that are subject to an offering.

As we learned: Four bring offerings for intentional acts as for unwitting acts.

It was also stated

like Abaye:

When Ravin came, he said that Rabbi Yosei said that Reish Lakish:

“And he shall confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their rebellious sins, for all their sins”—

“sins” analogous to “rebellious sins”: Just as rebellious sins, which are not subject to an offering, are atoned for, so too sins that are not subject to an offering are atoned for; but sins that are subject to an offering are not atoned for.

Abaye said: I too said it from this verse, and Rav Dimi challenged me: From where do you know that these rebellious sins are not subject to an offering? Perhaps those that are subject to an offering, as we learned: Four bring offerings for intentional acts as for unwitting acts!

Ravin said to him: Most rebellious sins

are not subject to an offering.

He said to him: Is “most”

of their rebellious sins

written?

Rather, Abaye said: From the beginning of the verse:

“And he shall confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel.”

And it was taught: “Iniquities”—

these are intentional acts, and so it says: [Numbers 15]

Его вина на нем».

“Its iniquity is upon it.”

And if so,

“and all their rebellious sins, for all their sins”—

why do I need it?

To compare rebellious sins: Just as rebellious sins are not subject to an offering,

and because it is speaking of an intentional act,

so too sins that are not subject to an offering are atoned for; but sins that are subject to an offering are not atoned for.

We learned in the Mishna:

We learned in the Mishna:

“Those liable for suspensive guilt-offerings”

over whom Yom Kippur passed are exempt from bringing one.

From where are these matters? Rabbi Elazar said that the verse says: [Leviticus 16]

От всех ваших грехов перед Господом

“From all your sins before the Lord,”

etc.: A sin of which only the Omnipresent is aware,

for it did not become known to the sinner that he certainly sinned—

Yom Kippur atones!