Shevuot 10a — the Talmud in English

And the goats of the festivals were juxtaposed with the goats of the New Moons,

to say:

Just as the goat of the New Moon atones for a matter of sanctity, so too the goats of the festivals atone for a matter of sanctity.

And if you would say,

perhaps you will say: If we juxtapose the festivals to the New Moon, let us say that

they atone

the goats of the festivals only

for the New Moon,

that is, only for a ritually pure person who eats impure sacred meat, but they do not atone for an impure person who ate sacred meat or entered the Temple while impure?

This cannot be said! For

we say

that there is a limitation with regard to the goat of the New Moon:

“It”

“He gave you to bear the iniquity of the congregation” —

it,

the sin-offering of the New Moon,

bears iniquity, and no

offering

else bears iniquity

for such eating of impure sacred meat! And necessarily, the atonement for sanctity of the goats of the festivals is for an impure person who ate pure sacred meat or who entered the Temple while impure!

And if you would say, they atone

the goats of the festivals

for Yom Kippur,

that is, for what the external goat atones: for a case in which there was no awareness at the beginning but there was awareness at the end?

This cannot be said thus! For

we say

a limitation with regard to the external goat: “And Aaron shall make atonement upon its horns

once a year” —

this atonement shall be only once a year!

And now that we know from where it follows that the goats of the festivals come to atone for the impurity of the Temple and its sacred objects, the Gemara explains for which type of awareness they come:

Why

for what,

do they atone

the goats of the festivals? —

If it is for a case in which there was awareness at the beginning and there was awareness at the end —

this is liable for an offering

of an individual

itself,

and it is not atoned for by a communal offering!

If it is for a case in which there was awareness at the beginning but there was no awareness at the end —

this is the case for which the goat whose blood is brought inside and Yom Kippur suspend judgment!

If it is for a case in which there was no awareness at the beginning but there was awareness at the end —

this is the case for which the goat whose blood is brought outside and Yom Kippur atone!

By necessity, it atones only,

we have no choice but to say that the goat of the festival atones only

for a case in which there was no awareness neither at the beginning nor at the end!

We learned in the Mishna:

Rabbi Meir says: The atonement of all the goats is equal!

Rav Ḥama bar Rabbi Ḥanina said: What is the reason of Rabbi Meir? —

The verse says “a goat

and a goat”; all the goats were juxtaposed to one another

by means of

the vav, which adds to the first matter!

It might have entered your mind —

each one learns from its fellow!

That is, the atonement of each one of the goats teaches about the goat adjacent to it in the passage; and after this goat learns from its predecessor, it in turn teaches about the goat adjacent to it.

And we raise an objection:

But Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Throughout the entire Torah, one learns “that which was learned” from “that which was learned”

[from a matter that itself was learned from another place],

except for sacrificial matters, where one does not learn that which was learned from “that which was learned”!

And we answer:

This is not difficult. They all learn from the first!

That is: Each goat does not teach the goat adjacent to it in a manner requiring one to learn that which was learned from “that which was learned”; rather, all the goats were juxtaposed, each one separately, to each other goat separately, to learn from it about its particular atonement.

And still it is difficult:

This works for every

goat

about which it is written “and a goat,”

with the addition of the vav of specification. But concerning the goats of

Shavuot and Yom Kippur, about which “and a goat” is not written, from where do we know

to juxtapose their atonement to the atonement of the other goats?

And we answer:

Rather, Rabbi Yona said: The verse says, “These you shall offer to the Lord on your festivals” —

all the festivals were juxtaposed to one another!

And from this juxtaposition you learn that the atonement of all the goats of the festivals is equal.

And we refute this:

But the New Moon is not a festival!

And how, then, is it included in this juxtaposition?

And we answer:

Indeed,

it is true:

the New Moon is also called a festival, as Abaye said.

For Abaye said: The Tammuz of that year,

in the second year after the Children of Israel left Egypt, when the spies were sent, on the twenty-ninth of Sivan, to spy out the land, and they returned after forty days, on the eighth of Av, and they wept on the night of the ninth of Av; that month of Tammuz

they filled

they filled it out

and made it a month of thirty days. That is, they established the New Moon of Av on the thirty-first day of the month of Tammuz [although according to the order of the months, Tammuz is always deficient, consisting of twenty-nine days, and the first day of Av should have fallen on the thirtieth day of Tammuz],

as it is written, “He proclaimed a festival against me

to break my young men.”

The calling of the New Moon of Av one day late was done so that the weeping of the Children of Israel in the wilderness would be on the night of the ninth of Av, which is a day designated for calamity; and as a result, the young men of Israel fell in the destruction of the Temple on that same day.

And it is proven from here that the day of the New Moon is called a festival!

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And Rabbi Meir concedes with regard to the goat whose blood is brought inside

on Yom Kippur [whose atonement is for one who had awareness at the beginning but did not have awareness at the end, who will be obligated to bring an individual offering once he becomes aware, while in the meantime the inner goat suspends judgment for him to protect him from suffering],

that it does not atone with their atonement

of the other goats.

And they do not atone with its atonement.

The Gemara explains:

It does not atone with their atonement,

because we expound from the word “one” at the end of the verse, [“Once a year he shall make atonement for it”] —

one atonement

it

atones for, and it does not atone for two atonements!

And likewise,

they —

do not atone with its atonement,

because

the verse says

at the beginning of the verse, “And Aaron shall make atonement upon its horns,

once a year” —

this atonement

of the inner goat

shall be only once a year!

It was also taught so in a beraita: For

the impurity of the Temple and its sacred objects

in which there was no awareness neither at the beginning nor at the end, and for one in which there was no awareness at the beginning but there was awareness at the end, and for a ritually pure person who ate the impure —

the goats of

the festivals, the goats of the New Moons, and the goat whose blood is brought outside atone; these are the words of Rabbi Meir!

And the Gemara infers:

But he left out the goat whose blood is brought inside!

Rabbi Meir left it out from mentioning it in the beraita together with them, and it is proven that he holds that the inner goat does not atone for those forms of awareness of impurity for which the other goats atone. And likewise,

its atonement,

that is, the atonement for one who has awareness at the beginning but no awareness at the end,

he also left out,

Rabbi Meir left it out from mentioning it in the beraita, because the other goats do not atone with this atonement of the inner goat.

We learned in the Mishna:

Rabbi Shimon would say: The goats of the New Moons atone for a ritually pure person who ate the impure, and so on. [And each goat has a different atonement.]

И у каждого козла своё искупление. ]

And we considered this:

Granted, the goats of the New Moons do not atone for the festivals, as the verse says

with regard to the goat of the New Moon

“iniquity,”

and we limit it —

it bears one iniquity and does not bear two iniquities! But

the goats

of the festivals, let them atone

also

for the New Moons?

And we answer:

The verse says

with regard to the goat of the New Moon

“it.”

The verse comes to limit and to say:

It,

the sin-offering that the Torah established for the goat of the New Moon,

bears iniquity. And no

offering

else bears iniquity

of the New Moon.

And furthermore, we considered this:

Granted, those of the festivals do not atone for Yom Kippur, as the verse says

at the beginning of the verse, “And Aaron shall make atonement upon its horns

one

a year” —

this atonement shall be only once a year! But with regard to Yom Kippur, let it atone for the festivals?

And we answer:

The verse says

at the end of the verse,

“One

a year he shall make atonement for it” —

it atones for one atonement, and it does not atone for two atonements!

And we refute this:

But when “one” is written —

it is written with regard to the goat whose blood is brought inside.

And if so, why should the external goat not atone for the other atonements?