atoning

HALAKHAH: 3. They asked before Rebbi Abba: Just as you are saying there, “one who slaughtered his purification sacrifice on the Sabbath did atone but has to bring another one,” so one should say also here, he did not accomplish his tearing. But it must follow Rebbi Simeon, since Rebbi Simeon said, only if he needed the thing itself. He told them, there he caused it himself, but here you caused it to him. Rebbi Yose said, and even there you caused it to him for had you not told him to come how could it be atoning? Is there need to say that it follows Rebbi Simeon?

It happened that one preceded another to within four cubits of the altar. The other took the knife and stuck it into his heart. Rebbi Sadoq stood on the steps of the Hall and said to them, listen to me, my brethren, the House of Israel. It is written, if a corpse be found. etc. Your elders and your judges shall go out. From where do we have to measure, from the Temple or from the courtyards? All the people started to cry. While they still were crying, the father of the child came and told them, I am atoning for you. The child is still fluttering, so the knife did not become impure. This teaches that impurity was worse for them than spilling blood, a shame.

From where that he is required to pour out? The verse says, he shall give of the blood of the bull and the blood of the he-goat, when they are mixed. I could think each one by itself, the verse says, Aaron shall atone on its corners once yearly, he atones once yearly, he does not atone twice yearly. Or should we say, the bull’s blood once yearly, not twice yearly? Rebbi Ismael stated, from the blood of the atoning purification offering, he atones once yearly, he does not atone twice yearly. Everybody agrees that for the seven sprinklings downward he has to pour, for it is written seven, not fourteen.

When he finished atoning the sanctuary. There are Tannaim who state, when he finished, he atoned There are Tannaim who state, when he atoned, he finished. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They differ by disagreement. He who said, when he atoned, he finished, the remainder is obstructive. He who said, when he finished, he atoned, the remainder is not obstructive. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, they differ in understanding. About the remainder (is it obstructive?), the remainder is not obstructive. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, the remainder is not obstructive. How is this? He who said, when he finished, he atoned, makes it four givings. He who said, when he atoned, he finished, makes it only one giving.

It was stated: “Rebbi Ismael said, if the remainder blood of purification sacrifices which does not atone is given on the base, the start of an elevation sacrifice which is atoning it is only logical that it be given on the base. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, No. If you said that the remainder blood of purification sacrifices which does not atone and is not able to atone are given on the base, the start of an elevation sacrifice which is atoning and is able to atone is only logical that it be given on the base.” He who said “does not atone”, they do not atone during all other days of the year; therefore on the Day of Atonement they atone. He who says “does not atone and is not able to atone”, they do not atone either on New Year’s Day and not on the Day of Atonement. Where do we hold? If for a commandment, it is a commandment to give on the base. But if it cannot refer to the commandment, let it refer to obstruction.

It was stated: “Rebbi Ismael said, if the remainder blood of purification sacrifices which does not atone is given on the base, the start of an elevation sacrifice which is atoning it is only logical that it be given on the base. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, No. If you said that the remainder blood of purification sacrifices which does not atone and is not able to atone are given on the base, the start of an elevation sacrifice which is atoning and is able to atone is only logical that it be given on the base.” He who said “does not atone”, they do not atone during all other days of the year; therefore on the Day of Atonement they atone. He who says “does not atone and is not able to atone”, they do not atone either on New Year’s Day and not on the Day of Atonement. Where do we hold? If for a commandment, it is a commandment to give on the base. But if it cannot refer to the commandment, let it refer to obstruction.

HALAKHAH: It was stated: “Rebbi Jehudah said, when has this been said? About service performed inside in white garments. But service performed outside in golden garments if he advanced one action to another, what he did is done. And the Sages are saying, even for service performed outside in golden garments if he advanced one action to another, he did not do anything.” Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Both of them are explaining the same verse: of the blood of the atoning sacrifice once. The rabbis are saying, service which is performed one [time] in the year. Rebbi Jehudah is saying, a place in which he enters one [time] per year.

The rabbis say, three for qualification and three for disqualification. Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon are saying, 43 for qualification and 43 for disqualification. Therefore the rabbis say, any seven are atonement by themselves. [Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon are saying, each single one is atonement by itself.] Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, the reason of Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon: he finished atoning for the holy, even if there is only one giving, the Torah says “he finished”.

It shall be made standing alive, This teaches that in the end it will die. How long must it live? Up to he will finish atoning the Sanctuary, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, up to the moment of confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, the confession is indispensable. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, the confession is not indispensable. What is the difference between them? If he sent it without a confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another he-goat. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another he-goat. The same holds for the bull. If he slaughtered without confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another bull. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another bull. If he confessed, slaughtered, then the blood was spilled. Do you say, does he have to bring another bull and confess a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession? The same holds for the scapegoat; must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession?

The bull, the ram, and the seven unblemished sheep were brought with the daily morning offering; the remainder were brought with the daily afternoon offering. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the reason of this Tanna is to join purification sacrifice to purification sacrifice and elevation sacrifice to elevation sacrifice. But some want to say, the bull, the ram, the people’s ram, and the seven unblemished sheep were brought with the daily morning offering; the remainder were brought with the daily afternoon offering. This Tanna distributes the services. What is the reason? He leaves and brings hiselevation sacrifice and the people’s elevation sacrifice. As mentioned in the matter. What is mentioned in the matter? His ram and the people’s ram. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, what is the reason for the he-goat? Of the blood of the atoning purification sacrifice. The atoning purification sacrifice already preceded.

The bull, the ram, and the seven unblemished sheep were brought with the daily morning offering; the remainder were brought with the daily afternoon offering. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the reason of this Tanna is to join purification sacrifice to purification sacrifice and elevation sacrifice to elevation sacrifice. But some want to say, the bull, the ram, the people’s ram, and the seven unblemished sheep were brought with the daily morning offering; the remainder were brought with the daily afternoon offering. This Tanna distributes the services. What is the reason? He leaves and brings hiselevation sacrifice and the people’s elevation sacrifice. As mentioned in the matter. What is mentioned in the matter? His ram and the people’s ram. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, what is the reason for the he-goat? Of the blood of the atoning purification sacrifice. The atoning purification sacrifice already preceded.

Rebbi Simon said, just as sacrifices atone, so the garments atone, shirt, trousers, turban, and vest. The shirt was atoning for [wearers of kilaim There are those who want to say,] for spillers of blood, as you are saying, they dipped the shirt in blood. The trousers were atoning for uncovering nakedness, as you are saying, make for them linen trousers to cover the fleshof nakedness. The turban was atoning for haughtiness, as you are saying, he put the turban on his head. The belt was atoning for [thieves; but some are saying, for] the crooked ones. Rebbi Levi said, it was 32 cubits and he wound it around on both sides. The breast plate was atoning for those who bend the law, as you are saying, you shall make a breast-plate of judgment. The vest was atoning for idol worshippers, as you are saying, without vest and household-gods. The coat. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Jonathan of Bet-Guvrin: For two things there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them. These are those: one who spreads slander, and the involuntary homicide. For him who spreads slander there was no atonement, but the Torah fixed atonement for them, the bells of the coat: it shall be on Aaron in service, and its sound be heard. The sound may come to atone for the sound. For the involuntary manslaughter there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them, the death of the High Priest. He shall dwell there until the High Priest’s death

Rebbi Simon said, just as sacrifices atone, so the garments atone, shirt, trousers, turban, and vest. The shirt was atoning for [wearers of kilaim There are those who want to say,] for spillers of blood, as you are saying, they dipped the shirt in blood. The trousers were atoning for uncovering nakedness, as you are saying, make for them linen trousers to cover the fleshof nakedness. The turban was atoning for haughtiness, as you are saying, he put the turban on his head. The belt was atoning for [thieves; but some are saying, for] the crooked ones. Rebbi Levi said, it was 32 cubits and he wound it around on both sides. The breast plate was atoning for those who bend the law, as you are saying, you shall make a breast-plate of judgment. The vest was atoning for idol worshippers, as you are saying, without vest and household-gods. The coat. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Jonathan of Bet-Guvrin: For two things there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them. These are those: one who spreads slander, and the involuntary homicide. For him who spreads slander there was no atonement, but the Torah fixed atonement for them, the bells of the coat: it shall be on Aaron in service, and its sound be heard. The sound may come to atone for the sound. For the involuntary manslaughter there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them, the death of the High Priest. He shall dwell there until the High Priest’s death

Rebbi Simon said, just as sacrifices atone, so the garments atone, shirt, trousers, turban, and vest. The shirt was atoning for [wearers of kilaim There are those who want to say,] for spillers of blood, as you are saying, they dipped the shirt in blood. The trousers were atoning for uncovering nakedness, as you are saying, make for them linen trousers to cover the fleshof nakedness. The turban was atoning for haughtiness, as you are saying, he put the turban on his head. The belt was atoning for [thieves; but some are saying, for] the crooked ones. Rebbi Levi said, it was 32 cubits and he wound it around on both sides. The breast plate was atoning for those who bend the law, as you are saying, you shall make a breast-plate of judgment. The vest was atoning for idol worshippers, as you are saying, without vest and household-gods. The coat. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Jonathan of Bet-Guvrin: For two things there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them. These are those: one who spreads slander, and the involuntary homicide. For him who spreads slander there was no atonement, but the Torah fixed atonement for them, the bells of the coat: it shall be on Aaron in service, and its sound be heard. The sound may come to atone for the sound. For the involuntary manslaughter there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them, the death of the High Priest. He shall dwell there until the High Priest’s death

Rebbi Simon said, just as sacrifices atone, so the garments atone, shirt, trousers, turban, and vest. The shirt was atoning for [wearers of kilaim There are those who want to say,] for spillers of blood, as you are saying, they dipped the shirt in blood. The trousers were atoning for uncovering nakedness, as you are saying, make for them linen trousers to cover the fleshof nakedness. The turban was atoning for haughtiness, as you are saying, he put the turban on his head. The belt was atoning for [thieves; but some are saying, for] the crooked ones. Rebbi Levi said, it was 32 cubits and he wound it around on both sides. The breast plate was atoning for those who bend the law, as you are saying, you shall make a breast-plate of judgment. The vest was atoning for idol worshippers, as you are saying, without vest and household-gods. The coat. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Jonathan of Bet-Guvrin: For two things there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them. These are those: one who spreads slander, and the involuntary homicide. For him who spreads slander there was no atonement, but the Torah fixed atonement for them, the bells of the coat: it shall be on Aaron in service, and its sound be heard. The sound may come to atone for the sound. For the involuntary manslaughter there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them, the death of the High Priest. He shall dwell there until the High Priest’s death

Rebbi Simon said, just as sacrifices atone, so the garments atone, shirt, trousers, turban, and vest. The shirt was atoning for [wearers of kilaim There are those who want to say,] for spillers of blood, as you are saying, they dipped the shirt in blood. The trousers were atoning for uncovering nakedness, as you are saying, make for them linen trousers to cover the fleshof nakedness. The turban was atoning for haughtiness, as you are saying, he put the turban on his head. The belt was atoning for [thieves; but some are saying, for] the crooked ones. Rebbi Levi said, it was 32 cubits and he wound it around on both sides. The breast plate was atoning for those who bend the law, as you are saying, you shall make a breast-plate of judgment. The vest was atoning for idol worshippers, as you are saying, without vest and household-gods. The coat. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Jonathan of Bet-Guvrin: For two things there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them. These are those: one who spreads slander, and the involuntary homicide. For him who spreads slander there was no atonement, but the Torah fixed atonement for them, the bells of the coat: it shall be on Aaron in service, and its sound be heard. The sound may come to atone for the sound. For the involuntary manslaughter there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them, the death of the High Priest. He shall dwell there until the High Priest’s death

Rebbi Simon said, just as sacrifices atone, so the garments atone, shirt, trousers, turban, and vest. The shirt was atoning for [wearers of kilaim There are those who want to say,] for spillers of blood, as you are saying, they dipped the shirt in blood. The trousers were atoning for uncovering nakedness, as you are saying, make for them linen trousers to cover the fleshof nakedness. The turban was atoning for haughtiness, as you are saying, he put the turban on his head. The belt was atoning for [thieves; but some are saying, for] the crooked ones. Rebbi Levi said, it was 32 cubits and he wound it around on both sides. The breast plate was atoning for those who bend the law, as you are saying, you shall make a breast-plate of judgment. The vest was atoning for idol worshippers, as you are saying, without vest and household-gods. The coat. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Jonathan of Bet-Guvrin: For two things there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them. These are those: one who spreads slander, and the involuntary homicide. For him who spreads slander there was no atonement, but the Torah fixed atonement for them, the bells of the coat: it shall be on Aaron in service, and its sound be heard. The sound may come to atone for the sound. For the involuntary manslaughter there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them, the death of the High Priest. He shall dwell there until the High Priest’s death

HALAKHAH: “He who pays the sheqel,” etc. We have stated, “if the sums were disbursed.” In the House of Rebbi it was stated, “if the animal was sacrificed.” Rebbi Eleazar said, who is the Tanna of “if the animal was sacrificed”? Rebbi Simeon, since Rebbi Simeon said, he receives his money immediately, the priests are quick. It is difficult. If somebody stole another’s elevation offering and slaughtered it without special mention, is it not without special mention atoning for the original owner? Rebbi Yudan said, explain it if it was a definite object, like that of the House of Rabban Gamliel who was taking aim throwing it into the chest. But should one not worry that maybe it will become part of the remainder; is there me`ilah for the remainder? But it must follow Rebbi Meïr, since Rebbi Meïr said, there is me`ilah for the remainder. Still if it was a definite object, like that of the House of Rabban Gamliel who was taking aim and disbursed it in his name.

MISHNAH: If there is no knowledge at the start but there is knowledge at the end, the he-goat brought outside or the Day of Atonement atone as it is said, in addition to the atoning purification offering; what the one atones for the other atones for. Since the one inside atones only on matters which were known, also the outside one should atone only on matters which were known.

HALAKHAH: “If there is no knowledge at the start,” etc. What can you see to say? Does the one inside suspend and the one outside atone, or the one outside suspend and the one inside atone, or both of them suspend, or both of them atone? What about it? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, I saw something. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish was asking before Rebbi Joḥanan and asked him, what are the differences in atoning? I do not know what he answered him. Rebbi Ze`ira said to him, maybe it is the following: How did you understand to explain it? About an impure person who ate pure [meat], or a pure person who ate impure [meat]? The verse says: his impurity is on him. Impurity of the body, not impurity of the meat. Or both of them atone? What about it? He should over it confess sins, these are intentional sins, their crimes, these are rebellions, their mistakes, these are unintentional sins. Then He said, he will atone. Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the he-goat will carry all their sins, he grabbed intentional sins and left out unintentional sins, to indicate that just as intentional sins do not carry the obligation of a sacrifice, so those unintentional sins which do not carry the obligation of a sacrifice. And why did they come here? Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Yasa, for suspension. Would it be understood to suspend for those who eat abominations and crawling things? Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: Their mistakes, their mistakes. Since their mistakes mentioned there are those which carry the obligation of a sacrifice, also their mistakes mentioned here are those which carry the obligation of a sacrifice. This excludes intentional sins which do not carry the obligation of a sacrifice. What is left out by the he-goat brought inside the Day of Atonement suspends. What did it leave out? If there is no knowledge at the start but there is knowledge at the end.

MISHNAH: But about where there is no knowledge either at the start or at the end, the he-goats of the holidays and the he-goats of the Days of the New Moon atone, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, the he-goats of the holidays atone but not the he-goats of the Days of the New Moon. What do the he-goats of the Days of the New Moon atone for? For the pure person who ate impure. Rebbi Meїr says, the atoning of all he-goats is the same, about the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta. Rebbi Simeon used to say, the he-goats of the holidays atone for the pure person who ate impure; those of the holidays atone for where there is no knowledge either at the start or at the end, and those of the Day of Atonement where there is no knowledge at the start but there is knowledge at the end. They asked him, could they be brought one for the other? He told them, they may be brought. They asked him, since their atoning is not the same, how can they be brought one for the other? He told them, all of them serve to atone for the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta.

MISHNAH: But about where there is no knowledge either at the start or at the end, the he-goats of the holidays and the he-goats of the Days of the New Moon atone, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, the he-goats of the holidays atone but not the he-goats of the Days of the New Moon. What do the he-goats of the Days of the New Moon atone for? For the pure person who ate impure. Rebbi Meїr says, the atoning of all he-goats is the same, about the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta. Rebbi Simeon used to say, the he-goats of the holidays atone for the pure person who ate impure; those of the holidays atone for where there is no knowledge either at the start or at the end, and those of the Day of Atonement where there is no knowledge at the start but there is knowledge at the end. They asked him, could they be brought one for the other? He told them, they may be brought. They asked him, since their atoning is not the same, how can they be brought one for the other? He told them, all of them serve to atone for the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta.

Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yasa: The one who stands before the Ark on New Year’s holiday does not have to mention the New Moon. Rebbi Aḥa bar Pappus said, it was stated thus: “The one who stands before the Ark on New Year’s holiday in the morning, the House of Shammai say, he prays eight [benedictions], but the House of Hillel say seven. For musaf, the House of Shammai say ten, but the House of Hillel say nine.” Should he not say eleven? Rebbi Yose said, where do they disagree? In a matter which needs a separate benediction. But here even on a weekday he simply includes it. So he should mention it in “Service”. Rebbi Yose asked, since the two he-goats of New Year’s day come because of the New Moon, why do you say that he does not have to mention the New Moon? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Bun said, does Rebbi Abba bar Mamal not ask correctly? As it was stated: “The two lambs of Pentecost and the two he-goats of New Year’s Day.” If the first atoned, what does the second atone for? For impurity that happened between them. Is that not Rebbi Simeon’s? And Rebbi Simeon splits atoning. But if both of them were for the New Moon? Rebbi Abba Mari said, you cannot do that, since it is written, in addition to the elevation offering of the month. In addition, from what we have stated, “twelve for the twelve months of the year.” A patrician stood before the Ark and did not mention the New Moon; they praised him. Rav Hoshaia asked: think of it, if they slaughtered both of them simultaneously? What impurity happened between them? Rebbi Bun said, if all of Israel are proper, would they not bring what the Torah prescribed for them?

HALAKHAH: “They said to him, did not the teacher use to say,” etc. Rebbi Yose the Southerner said before Rebbi Jonah: Would it not have been necessary to state, if it is so then those of the Days of the New Moon could be brought on the Day of Atonement since one increases holiness but one does not diminish; but those of the Day of Atonement cannot be brought on the Days of the New Moon since one does not diminish holiness. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Bun explained it by another explanation: if it is so then those of the Day of Atonement could be brought on the Days of the New Moon, for included in their atoning is the atoning of the Days of the New Moon, but those of the days of the New Moon cannot be brought on the Day of Atonement, for they atone only their atonement. For if anybody ate five olive-sized pieces of fat and dedicated four sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated five, did he atone? Or if he ate four olive sized pieces of fat, dedicated five sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated four, not so much more? And so “Rebbi Simeon used to say, thirty-two rams are brought for the public every year. Thirty one outside, they are eaten. One inside which is not eaten. And the scapegoat. Twelve for the twelve months of the year. Eight on Tabernacles, seven on Passover, two on Pentecost, one for the day and one for the bread. One on New Year’s Day and one on the Day of Atonement.” When Moses heard this he said, it follows that anybody for whom the doubt of a transgression arises should bring all these sacrifices! Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: When the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses, he shall confess on it etc., he started and said, A Song of confession, inspired by he shall confess on it.

HALAKHAH: “They said to him, did not the teacher use to say,” etc. Rebbi Yose the Southerner said before Rebbi Jonah: Would it not have been necessary to state, if it is so then those of the Days of the New Moon could be brought on the Day of Atonement since one increases holiness but one does not diminish; but those of the Day of Atonement cannot be brought on the Days of the New Moon since one does not diminish holiness. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Bun explained it by another explanation: if it is so then those of the Day of Atonement could be brought on the Days of the New Moon, for included in their atoning is the atoning of the Days of the New Moon, but those of the days of the New Moon cannot be brought on the Day of Atonement, for they atone only their atonement. For if anybody ate five olive-sized pieces of fat and dedicated four sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated five, did he atone? Or if he ate four olive sized pieces of fat, dedicated five sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated four, not so much more? And so “Rebbi Simeon used to say, thirty-two rams are brought for the public every year. Thirty one outside, they are eaten. One inside which is not eaten. And the scapegoat. Twelve for the twelve months of the year. Eight on Tabernacles, seven on Passover, two on Pentecost, one for the day and one for the bread. One on New Year’s Day and one on the Day of Atonement.” When Moses heard this he said, it follows that anybody for whom the doubt of a transgression arises should bring all these sacrifices! Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: When the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses, he shall confess on it etc., he started and said, A Song of confession, inspired by he shall confess on it.

HALAKHAH: “Together Israel, Cohanim,” etc. But we did not state “the Anointed.” Why did we not state “the Anointed”? If you say that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice, it is correct not to state “Anointed”. If you say about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, why do we not state “Anointed”? It was found stated “also the Anointed Priest.” This implies that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, even if you say, about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, if it was done intentionally. As you say, intentionally it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement, here also it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement.

HALAKHAH: “Together Israel, Cohanim,” etc. But we did not state “the Anointed.” Why did we not state “the Anointed”? If you say that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice, it is correct not to state “Anointed”. If you say about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, why do we not state “Anointed”? It was found stated “also the Anointed Priest.” This implies that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, even if you say, about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, if it was done intentionally. As you say, intentionally it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement, here also it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement.

HALAKHAH: “Together Israel, Cohanim,” etc. But we did not state “the Anointed.” Why did we not state “the Anointed”? If you say that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice, it is correct not to state “Anointed”. If you say about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, why do we not state “Anointed”? It was found stated “also the Anointed Priest.” This implies that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, even if you say, about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, if it was done intentionally. As you say, intentionally it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement, here also it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement.

HALAKHAH: “Together Israel, Cohanim,” etc. But we did not state “the Anointed.” Why did we not state “the Anointed”? If you say that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice, it is correct not to state “Anointed”. If you say about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, why do we not state “Anointed”? It was found stated “also the Anointed Priest.” This implies that we are discussing things which do not imply the obligation of a sacrifice. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, even if you say, about things which imply the obligation of a sacrifice, if it was done intentionally. As you say, intentionally it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement, here also it needs atoning and the atoning of the Day of Atonement.

Shall be stationed alive; this teaches that it the future it is going to die. How long must it live? Up to he will finish from atoning to Sanctuary, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, up to the moment of confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, the confession is indispensable. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, the confession is not indispensable. What is the difference between them? If he slaughtered without confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another bull. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another bull. The same holds for the scapegoat. If he sent it without a confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another goat. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another goat. If he confessed, slaughtered, then the blood was spilled. Do you say, does he have to bring another bull and confess a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession? The same holds for the scapegoat; must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession?

“One who makes a Non-Jew’s wine in purity,” etc. Rebbi Abin in the name of Rebbi Samuel, practice follows Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Abin in the name of Samuel. I am atoning for Rebbi Simeon, either permit to drink or forbid for usufruct. Rebbi Jeremiah said in the name of Rebbi Abbahu. There was a case and they permitted for drinking following Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: A Gentile does not make libation wine by throwing. Does a Gentile make libation wine in his rage? Let us hear from the following: An Aramean had boxes in a wine press. There came a Jew and sprinkled wine on them. The Aramean came [with] a pitcher and poured it out into the cistern. The case came before the rabbis who said, a Gentile does not make libation wine in his rage.

HALAKHAH: “Anything which is more frequent than another,” etc. [“If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull”,] for one is atoning, the other is being atoned for. It is preferable that the atoner precede the atoned for, as it is written, he shall atone for himself, and for his house, and for all the congregation of Israel. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. Between a voluntary gift of the community and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the prince has precedence. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, which one has precedence? Let us hear from the following: A voluntary gift of the Anointed and rams of idolatry were standing. The rams of idolatry have precedence since their blood enters inside. He only said “since their blood enters inside;” this implies that between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. If there were standing the bull of idolatry, the ram which accompanies it, and another purification sacrifice. The bull precedes the ram, the ram precedes the other purification sacrifice, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. How is this done? Rebbi Yose said, since the ram is dependent in time on the bull, it is as if the bull preceded it, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. The bull of idolatry precedes the ram because it precedes in Scripture. Rebbi Samuel the brother of Rebbi Berekhiah asked: But then that of the New Moon should precede the ram which comes with it because it precedes [in Scripture.] Rebbi Abba Mari said, you cannot do this; its purification sacrifice is defective: After the permanent elevation offering it shall be made, with its libation; it made it lean on the permanent elevation offering. Between the sacrifice of a man and the sacrifice of a woman, the man’s sacrifice has precedence. That is, if both were equal. But if one was a bull and the other a lamb, it is what Rebbi Phineas said in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: A slave brings a bull and his master brings a bull, the slave’s precedes the master’s, as we have stated there: “If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull in all its ceremonies.”

We don't make them a son of a divorcee or a son of a Levirite marriage, as we said before and we don't exile them to a city of refuge as we said before, and we don't make them pay compensation (regarding a violent ox that kills) [because] the compensation is an atonement, and false witnesses do not need atoning.