Yoma 65b — the Talmud in English

But what do you mean by

public offerings

—that there is a difficulty with my statement?!

There is a distinction to be made between the obligation to bring the shekels and the public offerings that come from the contribution of the chamber:

different

are the

offerings of the

public,

public

that from the beginning of the month of Nisan onward do not come from the contribution of the previous year,

and

the words of

Rabbi Tavi

who

said

in the name of

Rabbi Yoshiyah: Rabbi Tavi said in the name of Rabbi Yoshiyah: The verse says

[Numbers 28:14] concerning the burnt-offering of the new moon:

“This is the burnt-offering of the new moon in its renewal

for the months of the year.” Extra expressions of “month” were mentioned in the verse, and from here the Sages expounded:

Renew, and bring to Me

the offerings of the year

from a new contribution.

Therefore Rabbi Judah agrees concerning the goats of Yom Kippur that were lost, that they are not sacrificed in the following year.

And we raise an objection: Rabbi Judah spoke about the bull and the goat of Yom Kippur, and said that both of them shall die.

That works

the refutation of Rava indeed resolves the matter concerning the

goat

that comes from the funds of the contribution of the chamber, but concerning the

bull

that comes from the money of the High Priest,

what is there to say—

why do we not say that it should be sacrificed in the following year?

And we answer: The Sages decreed a

decree

that it is forbidden to sacrifice the bull,

lest

[perhaps] they come to sacrifice also the

goat

[which comes from the contribution of the chamber] in the following year.

And we wonder at Rava’s words:

And

is it

because of a decree

that the Sages said that they should

die?!

It would have been sufficient, because of the decree, to say that the bull should graze, and another should be brought with its value when it develops a disqualifying defect.

Furthermore,

even concerning the goat there is a difficulty:

This statement of Rabbi

Tavi in the name of Rabbi Yoshiyah

[who said that the public offerings do not come from the old contribution] is

a mitzva

only

it is,

but if he sacrificed from the old contribution, he has fulfilled his obligation after the fact.

For Rabbi Judah said in the name of Samuel: Public offerings that come on the first of Nisan

and thereafter,

it is a mitzva to bring from the new

[from the contribution of the new year].

And if he brought from the old, he has fulfilled

the obligation after the fact,

except that the mitzva is lacking.

And since, after the fact, if he sacrificed the public offerings from the old contribution, he has fulfilled his obligation, it is not fitting to kill the goat because of something that is only a mitzva.

Rava’s answer is rejected. And now the difficulty returns: Why are the bull and the goat of Yom Kippur that were lost not sacrificed in the following year [according to Rabbi Judah]?

Rather, Rabbi Zeira said

another answer:

Because the lottery

that was performed in this year

establishes [the designation] from one year to another,

therefore it is impossible to sacrifice in the following year the goat that remained from this year.

And we raise an objection:

Let us bring

another goat in the following year

and conduct a lottery

over them as at first! And we answer: We do not do so because of a

decree,

for the Sages were concerned that if in the following year they bring the goat that remained from the year,

perhaps

there will be people who will not see that they conducted a new lottery over the goats, and

will say: The lottery establishes [the designation] from one year to another

even without conducting a second lottery.

And we raise an objection: Rabbi Judah spoke about the bull and the goat of Yom Kippur, and said that both of them shall die, and

that works,

Rabbi Zeira’s answer indeed resolves the matter concerning the

goat

that is sanctified through a lottery.

But concerning the

bull

[which does not require a lottery],

what is there to say—

why do we not say that it should be sacrificed in the following year?

And we answer: The Sages decreed a

decree

that it is forbidden to sacrifice the bull,

lest

[perhaps] they come to sacrifice also the

goat

in the following year.

And we wonder:

And

is it

because of a decree

that the Sages said that they should

die?!

It would have been sufficient to say that the bull should graze [and another should be brought with its value]!

Rabbi Zeira’s answer is rejected, and the difficulty returns: Why are the bull and the goat of Yom Kippur that were lost not sacrificed in the following year [according to Rabbi Judah]?

And the following answer

the Rabbis said

[the students of Abaye]

before Abaye:

The Sages decreed a

decree

that it is forbidden to sacrifice the bull in the following year,

because

they were concerned that perhaps the High Priest would die in this year, and they would sacrifice his bull, and this would be

a sin-offering whose owners have died

which is forbidden to sacrifice.

And we raise an objection:

That works

this answer indeed resolves the matter concerning the

bull

belonging to the High Priest [and there is concern that he will die]. But concerning the

goat

that belongs to the public,

what is there to say—

why is it not sacrificed in the following year?

And we answer: The Sages decreed a

decree

that it is forbidden to sacrifice the

goat, lest

[perhaps] they also sacrifice the

bull.

And we wonder:

And

is it

because of a decree

that the Sages said that they should

die?!

It would have been sufficient to say that the goat should graze [and another should be brought with its value]!

This answer is rejected, and the difficulty returns: Why are the bull and the goat of Yom Kippur not sacrificed in the following year [according to Rabbi Judah]?

Rather

another answer must be given:

The Sages decreed a

decree

that it is forbidden to sacrifice the goat in the following year

because of a sin-offering whose year has passed.

For they were concerned that by the next Yom Kippur a full year would have passed since this goat was born. And a sin-offering is fit only during the first year of its life. And immediately the Gemara wonders at the one answering: Why do you call this a

decree?!

Surely by the next Yom Kippur a full year will certainly have passed, and consequently

it itself

[the goat itself]

is a sin-offering whose year has passed,

and it is forbidden by Torah law to sacrifice it!

And the one answering reconciles his words:

That is not difficult.

There is a case in which, by the next Yom Kippur, the goat will not be disqualified by Torah law because it is a sin-offering whose year has passed,

as

the words of

Rabbi

that follow:

For it was taught:

One who sells a house in walled cities may redeem it until a year is completed. And concerning this it is said [Leviticus 25:30]:

“A complete year.” “

Complete” teaches that he

counts three hundred and sixty-five days, corresponding to the number of days

of the

solar

year. And the solar year is longer than the lunar year by eleven days. And even if they intercalated the year [when the lunar year is then longer than the solar year], they always follow the solar year.

And the Sages say:

In an ordinary year [which is not intercalated]

he counts twelve months from day to day,

as Israel counts according to the months of the moon.