משנה: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשְּׁמוֹ שְׂעִירֵי רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים מְכַפְּרִין עַל הַטָּהוֹר שֶׁאָכַל מִן הַטָּמֵא מוֹסִף עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁל רְגָלִים שֶׁמְּכַפְּרִין עַל הַטָּהוֹר שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַטָּמֵא וְעַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה לֹא בַתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא בַסּוֹף. מוֹסִף עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁהֵן מְכַפְּרִין עַל הַטָּהוֹר שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַטָּמֵא וְעַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה לֹא בַתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא בַסּוֹף וְעַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה בַתְּחִלָּה אֲבָל יֶשׁ בָּהּ יְדִיעָה בַסּוֹף. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ אוֹמֵר הָיָה רִבִּי שֶׁיִּקְרְבוּ זֶה בָזֶה אָמַר לָהֶם הֵין. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ אִם כֵּן יִהְיוּ שֶׁל יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים קְרֵיבִין בְּרָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים אֲבָל הֵיאַךְ שֶׁל רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים קְרֵבִין בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים לְכַפֵּר כַּפָּרָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ שֶׁלָּהֶן. אָמַר לָהֶן כּוּלָּן בָּאִין לְכַפֵּר עַל טוּמְאַת מִקְדָּשׁ וָקֳדָשָׁיו׃ MISHNAH: Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah said in his166R. Simeon (ben Ioḥai). name, the rams of the New Moon Days atone for the pure person who ate of impure [sacrifice]. Those of the holidays add to them in that they atone for the pure person who ate impure [sacrifice] and for [infractions] of which there was knowledge neither at the start nor at the end. Those of the Day of Atonement add to them in that they atone for the pure person who ate impure [sacrifice] and for [infractions] of which there was knowledge neither at the start nor at the end and those for which there was no knowledge at the beginning but there was at the end167He disagrees with the Tanna of Mishnah 5. R. Simeon does not hold that the different kinds of public purification sacrifices are for different kinds of offenses but that there are different kinds of effectiveness, the power of the sacrifice of a more holy day is strictly greater than that of the day of lesser holiness..
They said to him, did not the teacher166R. Simeon (ben Ioḥai). use to say that they may be sacrificed one for the other? He said, yes. They said to him, if it is so then those of the Day of Atonement could be brought on the Days of the New Moon. But how could those of the Days of the New Moon be brought on the Day of Atonement to atone an atonement which is not theirs168Since the rams of the Day of Atonement were destined for two additional powers not in those of the New Moon.? He told them, all of them serve to atone for the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta125,Mishnah 3.160The dedication prepares it to atone for impurities, to fulfill a biblical commandment. The particular instances of atonement are not on the mind of the person making the dedication; therefore, the ram may be used on all occasions where Scripture uses similar wording. It is noted in the next Halakhah that a dedication for sacrifice, whatever it will be, is sufficient..
הלכה: אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ אוֹמֵר הָיָה רִבִּי כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי דְּרוֹמִייָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוּנָה. הָכֵן צוֹרְכָה לְמִיתְנֵי. אִם כֵּן יְהוּ שֶׁל רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים קְרֵיבִין בְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים. שֶׁכֵּן מַעֲלִין בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין. אֲבָל שֶׁלְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים אֵין קְרֵיבִין בְּרֹאשׁ חוֹדֶשׁ. שֶׁאֵין מוֹרִידִין בַּקּוֹדֶשׁ. רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי בּוּן פָּתַר לָהּ פֶּתֶר חוֹרוֹן. אִם כֵּן יְהוּ שֶׁלְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים קְרֵיבִין בְּרָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים. שֶׁמְּכַפְּרִין כַּפָּרָתָן וְכַפָּרַת רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים. אֲבָל שֶׁל רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים אֵין קְרֵיבִין בְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים. שֶׁאֵין מְכַפְּרִין אֶלָּא כַפָּרָתָן בִּלְּבַד. אִילּוּ מִי שֶׁאָכַל חֵלֶב חֲמִשָּׂה זֵתִים וְהִפְרִישׁ אַרְבָּעָה קָרְבָּנוֹת וְסָבוּר שֶׁהֵן חֲמִשָּׁה שֶׁמָּא כִיפֵּר. אוֹ אִילּוּ מִי שֶׁאָכַל חֵלֶב אַרְבָּעָה זֵתִים וְהִפְרִישׁ חֲמִשָּׂה קָרְבָּנוֹת וְסָבוּר אַרְבָּעָה לֹא כָל־שֶׁכֵּן. וְכֵן הָיָה רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. שְׁלֹשִׁים וּשְׁנַיִם שְׂעִירִים קְרֵיבִין עַל הַצִּיבּוּר בְּכָל־שָׁנָה. שְׁלֹשִׁים וְאֶחָד בַּחוּץ וְנֶאֱכָלִין. וְאָחָד בִּפְנִים וְאֵינוּ נֶאֱכָל. וּשְׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ. שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר לִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חָדְשֵׁי שָׁנָה. שְׁמוֹנָה בֶחָג. שִׁבְעָה בַפֶּסַח. שְׁנַיִם בָּעֲצֶרֶת. אֶחָד בִּגְלָל הַיּוֹם וְאֶחָד בִּגְלָל הַלֶּחֶם. אֶחָד בְּרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה וְאֶחָד בְּיוּם הַכִּיפּוּרִים. כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁמַע מֹשֶׁה כֵן אָמַר. מֵעַתָּה מִי שֶׁבָּאָת לְיָדוֹ סְפֵק עֲבֵירָה צָרִיךְ לָהָבִיא כָל קָרְבָּנוֹת הַלָּלוּ. רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא בְשֵׁם רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוךְ הוּא לְמֹשֶׁה וְהִתְוַדָּ֣ה עָלָ֗יו וגו׳ הִתְחִיל וְאָמַר מִזְמ֥וֹר לְתוֹדָ֑ה עַל שֵׁם וְהִתְוַדָּ֣ה עָלָ֗יו. 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 holiness169A general principle (cf. Bikkurim 3:3, Note 57; Yoma 3:8 41a l. 10, Megillah 1:12 72a l. 47, Horaiot 3:3 Note 151; Babli Yoma 12b). Since this principle cannot be overridden, it is an argument not for practice but against R. Simeon’s opinion that the sacrifices can be substituted one for the other and for R. Meїr’s that they cannot.
The argument presupposes that the cumulation of cases for which the sacrifices atone indicates a higher state of holiness.. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Bun170The name tradition is impossible. The second generation R. Eleazar cannot transmit in the name of the third generation R. Bun I or the fourth generation R. Bun II. Probably one should read: R. Bun in the name of R. Elazar or even R. Yose ben R. Bun in the name of R. Eleazar. Cf. Note 24. explained it by another explanation171To uphold the text of the Mishnah. Since the argument is directed against one made in the Academy of R. Jonah, of the last generation of Galilean Amoraim, it should be attributed to the absolutely last Amora R. Yose ben R. Bun.: 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 Moon172He asserts that all purification sacrifices have the same status of holiness but their effectiveness depends on the intent of their dedication. One sacrifice atones for all instances for which it was dedicated but none for which it was not dedicated. He must assume that the dedication was for a purification sacrifice, not for “a sacrifice whichever it will be” since the only public sacrifices of rams are purification sacrifices including the scapegoat., 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 atone173Assuming that he is obligated to bring five different sacrifices for five different inadvertent sins punishable by extirpation of which eating fat is the paradigm (cf. Horaiot 3:3). If he offered only four, one sin by necessity remains without atonement.? 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 more174Automatically all sins are atoned for (even though one would expect the case never to happen since the owner of the sacrifice is required to confess his sin while leaning with his hands on the head of the sacrifice (Lev. 4:29), and probably would detect his error.)? And so 175Tosephta 1:2.“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 eaten176Some of the blood of the purification offering of the Day of Atonement is brought inside the Sanctuary; the rest has to be burned outside the Sanctuary (Lev. 6:23). All other purification sacrifices must be eaten by the priests, (Lev. 6:22).. 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.” 177A similar text in Midrash Tehillim 100. It is standard Galilean doctrine that the 11 Psalms 90–100 were composed by Moses (even Ps. 99!), not only Ps. 90 as indicated by its header. In the Babylonian tradition (transmitted by prayer texts) Moses was the author of Pss. 90–91 and the Sabbath of Ps. 92. 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 confess178Lev. 16:21. This resolved Moses’s problem and informed him that his prior concern, that the slightest doubt might impose an unbearable financial burden on the sinner, was unfounded. on it etc., he started and said, A Song of confession179Ps. 100:1. Usually, one translates “a song of thanksgiving” since this is appropriate for the תוֹדָה sacrifice [Lev. r. 9(3)]., inspired by he shall confess on it.