Yoma 61a — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

The tanna of the Mishna is not speaking about the incense

but about the laws of the sprinklings themselves; and in any event he must return, take a handful, and burn the incense.

Ulla said: If one slaughtered the goat before the application of the blood of the bull

inside the innermost place,

he has accomplished nothing

, for the slaughtering of the goat is taught after the application of the blood of the bull inside the innermost place, and it therefore prevents it.

We learned

in our Mishna:

He advanced the blood of the goat before the blood of the bull

. And the Gemara initially understood it to mean: He advanced the applications of the goat inside the innermost place before the applications of the blood of the bull

—he should return and sprinkle from the blood of the goat after the blood of the bull.

And if it is so

according to Ulla’s statement, since he slaughtered the goat before he sprinkled from the blood of the bull,

he should return

and slaughter it is what it should have said

for the tanna to say, [see the note ].

Ulla interpreted

our Mishna:

With regard to the applications

of the goat and of the bull

that are in the Sanctuary

, and in them he advanced the application of the blood of the goat before the application of the blood of the bull; but the goat was slaughtered after the applications inside the innermost place.

And likewise Rav Afes said: With regard to the applications that are in the Sanctuary.

В Мишне мы учили: если до завершения окроплений во внутренней части Храма кровь пролилась, он должен принести другую кровь и вновь начать с начала во внутренней части Храма,

We learned in the Mishna: If, before he completed the applications inside, the blood was spilled, he brings other blood and returns to the beginning, inside,

and likewise in the Sanctuary and likewise on the altar

of gold, for all of them are separate atonements:

The Sages taught:

One who was impure and entered the Temple, or impurity occurred to him while he was in the Temple and he remained there for the measure of bowing, is liable for an ascending-and-descending offering if he had awareness initially [that he had become impure] and awareness at the end, whereas at the time of the transgression the impurity was hidden from him.

If he had awareness initially but not at the end, even though he does not know that he sinned, he must be concerned, for even the unwitting require atonement when they come to know; thus, even before awareness they are liable to punishment. And the sprinklings of the blood of the bull atone for the koanim, and the blood of the goat atones for Israel—with Yom Kippur itself—and protect from suffering until they come to know and achieve atonement through their offering [Shevuot 2a, and Rashi].

And this is what Scripture said at the end of the passage of the Yom Kippur service: “And he shall atone for the holy Sanctuary and for the Tent of Meeting and for the altar he shall atone, and for the koanim and for all the people of the assembly he shall atone” (290):

“And he shall atone”

through the sprinklings of the blood of the bull and the goat

“for the holy Sanctuary: This is inside the innermost place”, “for impurity that occurred inside the innermost place, or if a person entered there while impure” [Rashi].

—“for impurity that occurred in the innermost chamber, or if a person entered there while impure” [Rashi].

“And

the Tent of Meeting”:

This is

impurity that is in the

Sanctuary

; “and the

altar, as it is understood

”—for one who performed service while impure on the altar without liability for [impurity of] the Temple, such as one who became impure in the Temple and performed service without remaining there [for the measure of bowing], for there is no impurity of the Temple here, since when one becomes impure in the courtyard, we hold by a halakha given to Moses at Sinai in Shevuot that he is not liable until he remains there for the measure of bowing [the wording of Rashi, Hullin 131b, and see the note ].

“He shall atone”: These are

impurities that are in the

courtyards

, for impurity that occurred in the courtyard [Rashi, Hullin].

And who are those who achieve atonement for the impurity of the Temple and its sacred objects through the blood of the bull and the goat [see the note ]:

And concerning

“the koanim,” as understood

, who inadvertently entered the courtyard while impure; and concerning all

“the people of the assembly”: These are Israelites; “he shall atone”: These are the Levites

, [for they are not called “people,” whereas here it is written “the people of the assembly,” Gevurat Ari].

It follows that

“they were all equated”

—by this second “he shall atone” [Rashi]—koanim, Levites, and Israelites

for one atonement

, and in what atonement were they equated? For you cannot say that it is in the atonement of the blood of the bull and the goat, since the bull atones for the koanim, and the goat for Levites and Israelites—

It follows:

that all achieve atonement through

the confession of

the scapegoat for the other transgressions, the words of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Shimon says

: Koanim, Levites, and Israelites were not equated in atonement for the other transgressions—

Rather:

Just as the blood of the goat that is performed inside

which has no confession

atones for Israel for the impurity of the Temple and its sacred objects, so the blood of the bull

alone, without the confession concerning it,

atones for the koanim for the impurity of the Temple and its sacred objects;

and the confession of the bull remains in order to atone for another matter—

And just as the confession of the scapegoat atones for Israel for the other transgressions, so the confession of the bull atones for the koanim for the other transgressions.

The Sages taught:

It is written: “And he shall finish atoning for the Sanctuary, and for the Tent of Meeting, and for the altar”:

“And he shall finish atoning for the Sanctuary”

—this is

the sprinklings that are

inside the innermost place

, between the staves.

“And

for the Tent of Meeting”—

this is

the sprinklings that are in the

Sanctuary

, before the curtain.

“And for the

altar”—

as it is understood

: the sprinklings on the golden altar.

And why is “ את” said with regard to each one of them [Ritva]? This

teaches: that all of them are separate atonements; from here they said

, that if the blood was spilled after one atonement, he need not return and repeat it, as he goes on to explain:

a.

He applied some of the applications inside

[inside the innermost place]

and the blood was spilled; he brings other blood and begins at the beginning with the applications inside; Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: He begins only from the place where he stopped.

b.

He completed the applications inside, and the blood was spilled; he brings other blood and begins at the beginning with the applications in the Sanctuary

before the curtain, and he need not return and sprinkle inside the innermost place, since all of them are separate atonements.

c.

He applied some of the applications in the Sanctuary and the blood was spilled; he brings other blood and begins at the beginning in the Sanctuary; Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: From the place where he stopped

—from there

he begins.

d.

He completed the applications in the Sanctuary and the blood was spilled; he brings other blood and begins at the beginning with the applications of the altar

, and he need not repeat the atonements that he already performed, for all of them are separate atonements.

e.

He applied some of the applications on the altar, and the blood was spilled; he brings other blood and begins at the beginning with the applications of the altar

, and he need not repeat the applications inside the innermost place, nor the applications in the Sanctuary.

Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: From the place where he stopped

—from there

he begins.

And.

Once he completed the presentations on the altar and the blood was spilled, everyone agrees:

the pouring of the remainder

does not prevent [the offering].

Rabbi Yohanan said: And both—

Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon, who disagreed as to whether he returns and performs [the service] from the beginning of the atonement, or begins from the place where he stopped—

derived [their views] from one verse:

as it is written: “And Aaron shall atone upon its horns”—of the inner altar—

“with the blood of the sin offering of the atonements once a year”

he shall atone for it throughout your generations.

Rabbi Meir holds: “One sin offering” [

one animal]

I told you

to effect every atonement,

and not two sin offerings [

two animals] for one atonement; and therefore he performs the entire atonement from the second animal.

Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon hold: “One act of expiation” [

one sprinkling]

I told you

in one place,

and not two acts of expiation;

he does not repeat the sprinkling two times, but performs only the continuation of the sprinkling from the second animal.

A metzora who recovered from his tzaraat, after he brought for his purification two birds, cedar wood, hyssop, and a strip of crimson wool, and the kohen slaughtered one of the birds, and immersed its fellow together with the cedar and the crimson wool in the blood of the slaughtered bird, and sprinkled upon the metzora seven times, and shaved him and immersed him—

he counts seven days for him, and on the seventh day shaves him a second time [and immerses him again, Rambam]; and on the eighth day he immerses another time, and brings his offerings [in order to qualify him to eat sacrificial food]: a lamb for a guilt offering, and with the guilt offering he brings a log of oil, and a female sheep for a sin offering, and a lamb for a burnt offering, and the meal offering of fine flour.

And at the beginning of his atonement, he slaughters the guilt offering [and throws its blood upon the altar, and afterward] he sprinkles from its blood upon the middle cartilage of the ear of the metzora and upon the thumbs of his right hand and foot, and afterward he takes the oil, and the kohen pours it upon the left palm of another kohen, and sprinkles toward the curtain opposite the Holy of Holies seven sprinklings, and afterward sprinkles from it in the place where he sprinkled from the blood upon the cartilage and the right thumbs, and the remainder in the palm the kohen places upon the head of the purified one, and he offers the sin offering, the burnt offering, and the meal offering, [the introduction of the Meiri].

It was taught: Rabbi said: Rabbi Yaakov gave me a division regarding the logs

of oil of a metzora—

That is to say: Rabbi Yaakov gave me a distinction regarding the presentations of the log of oil of a metzora, which were not equated with the presentation of the blood of Yom Kippur, and he taught me: Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon also agree concerning it that we do not say, “He begins from the place where he stopped”; and if he brought another log in the middle of the presentation of the oil inside, he returns to the beginning of the presentations, and likewise with the presentation upon the thumbs—

and the reason is: “One log” of oil I told you should effect the atonement through it, and not two logs for one atonement, since here one cannot expound, “One act of expiation I told you, and not two acts of expiation.”

We raise an objection:

But

is it the case that

not

did Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon disagree even concerning the log of oil of a metzora, saying: He begins from the place where he stopped?!

And it was taught

concerning the sprinklings of the log of oil of a metzora, in the manner of what they said concerning the bull and the goat of Yom Kippur:

a.

He gave

from the oil

some of the presentations inside, and [the oil] was spilled

he shall bring another log, and begin at the beginning with the presentations inside,

that is to say: with those presentations with which he began.

Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: He begins from the place where he stopped,

and he need not begin from the beginning, for although the expression “sin offering” was not stated concerning it, to expound the expression “act of expiation,” nevertheless we derive it from the presentations of Yom Kippur [Ritba].

b.

He completed the presentations that are in the Sanctuary [

before the curtain]

and the log was spilled; he shall bring another log and begin at the beginning with the presentations upon the thumbs,

and he need not repeat the presentations inside.

c.

He gave some of the presentations upon the thumbs and the log was spilled; he shall bring a log [

another],

and begin at the beginning with the presentations upon the thumbs; Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon say: He begins from the place where he stopped,

and he need not begin from the beginning of the presentations upon the thumbs.

d.

He completed the presentations upon the thumbs and the log was spilled; everyone agrees: The presentations upon the head do not prevent [the offering].

And we answer:

Say

that this is what Rabbi said:

Rabbi Yaakov taught me

this disagreement also

concerning the logs.

The master said: The presentations upon the head do not prevent [the offering]; what is the reason?

If you say it is because it is written: “And the remainder” of the oil

that is upon the palm of the kohen he shall place upon the head of the one who is purified; and since Scripture called it by the expression “remainder,” learn from it that the remainder does not prevent [the offering] [Ra’al].

But if that is so,

concerning a meal offering, where it is written: “And the kohen shall take a handful,” etc.

“And the remainder of the meal offering”

to Aaron and to his sons,

is it also the case that they do not prevent [the offering],

because Scripture called it “remainder,” as though it were merely a secondary thing and a remainder [Ritba]?! But we learned: If the remainder became lacking between the taking of the handful and the burning, one does not burn the handful upon it.

And we answer:

That case is different

concerning a metzora,

for it is written:

“And the kohen shall dip his right finger from the oil that is upon his palm,” etc.

And from the remainder

of the oil that is upon his palm the kohen shall place upon the cartilage, etc.,

and the remainder

of the oil that is upon the palm of the kohen he shall place upon the head of the one who is purified—

it follows that what he places upon the head of the one who is purified is “the remainder of the remainder,” and it indicates that it is not an actual remainder, but rather the remainder of the remainder, which does not prevent [the offering] [Ra’al].

Rabbi Yohanan said: