Keritot 50

Chapter 50

א אשם תלוי בא על הנבלה אמר ליה והאנן תנן וחכמים אומרים אינו מביא אשם תלוי אלא על דבר שזדונו כרת ושגגתו חטאת ואי ר' אליעזר בנדבה נמי אתי
1 Nebelah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. Nebelah is subject to a prohibition involving only the penalty of stripes but not kareth. Its transgression in error is, therefore, not subject to a sin-offering');"><sup>1</sup></span> is subject to a suspensive guilt-offering. Said the latter to him: Have we not learnt, THE SAGES HOLD THAT ONE MAY NOT BRING A SUSPENSIVE GUILT-OFFERING EXCEPT FOR A [PARTICULAR] SIN. THE WILFUL TRANSGRESSION OF WHICH IS SUBJECT TO KARETH AND THE INADVERTENT TRANSGRESSION OF WHICH IS SUBJECT TO A SIN-OFFERING? And should you follow R'Eliezer's view, behold he maintains that it may be offered as a freewill sacrifice!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is, accordingly, superfluous to state that it may be offered for a prohibition.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב אמר ליה מ"ט לא מתנית זימנין סגיאין תניתה קמי מר ומנו רבה ואמר לי הא מני רבי אליעזר היא דאמרו לו דתנן אלא אומרים לו המתן עד שתכנס לבית הספק
2 - Replied the former: Why do you not study [thoroughly]? Many a time I put this question before the Master, namely Rabbah, and he replied: This represents the view of R'Eliezer as [suggested] by 'those who spoke to him',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reference is to the reply made by the Rabbis to Baba b. Buta in our MISHNAH: According to them, one is not advised to bring a suspensive guilt-offering except with reference to a specific sin. R. Hiyya lets us know that this sin may be a prohibition which involves stripes and not kareth.');"><sup>3</sup></span> as we have learnt: BUT THEY SAID UNTO ME, WAIT UNTIL YOU HAVE COME TO A STATE OF DOUBT. Said Raba, What is the reason of 'those that spoke to him? ' - The text reads. And [doeth] through error [any one of all the things] which [the Lord his God hath commanded] not to be done, and is guilty.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This text does not literally occur in connection with the suspensive guilt-offering (Lev. V, 17-19) . but in IV, 22 with reference to the sin-offering of the prince. It should rather read here: Which (the Lord hath commanded) not to be done, though he know it not, yet he is guilty, of Lev. V, 17 (v. Rabbenu Gershom) . This passage suggests that that guilt-offering is offered only for a particular transgression prohibited by the Lord.');"><sup>4</sup></span> Raba also said: What is the reason of the Rabbis who maintain that one may not bring a suspensive guilt-offering except for a [particular] sin the wilful transgression of which is subject to kareth and the inadvertent transgression of which is subject to a sin-offering?
ג אמר רבא מאי טעמא דאמרו לו אמר קרא (ויקרא ד, ב) אשר לא תעשינה בשגגה ואשם
3 They derive [their ruling] from the sin-offering for heleb<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The eating of heleb is the prototype of a sin which involves a sin-offering. For heleb v. Glos.');"><sup>5</sup></span> by the analogy based upon the common term mitzwoth:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Commandments'; occurring in Lev. IV, 27 with reference to the sin-offering and in V, 17 with reference to the suspensive guilt-offering; v. also supra 22b.');"><sup>6</sup></span> As in that instance<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the sin-offering.');"><sup>7</sup></span> [it is brought] for a sin that is subject to kareth in the case of wilfulness and to a sin-offering in the case of erro also in our instance,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the suspensive guilt-offering.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ד אמר רבא מ"ט דרבנן דאמרי אין מביאין אשם תלוי אלא על דבר שזדונו כרת ושגגתו חטאת ילפי מצות מצות מחטאת חלב
4 [it is brought] for such sins as are subject to kareth in the case of wilfulness and to a sin-offering in the case of error. Our Rabbis taught: The five guilt-offerings<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The ordinary guilt-offering is prescribed in five instances: for sacrilege (Lev. V, 15f) . for robbery (ibid. 21f.) , for the leper (ibid. XIV, 12) , for connection with a designated bondmaid (ibid. XIX, 20f.) and for the nazirite (Num. VI, 12) .');"><sup>9</sup></span> effect [complete] atonement; the suspensive guilt-offering does not effect complete atonement. How is this to be understood? - Said Rab Joseph.
ה מה להלן שזדונו כרת ושגגתו חטאת אף כאן דבר שזדונו כרת ושגגתו חטאת:
5 
ו תנו רבנן חמשה אשמות מכפרין אשם תלוי אין מכפר כפרה גמורה מאי קאמר אמר רב יוסף ה"ק חמשה אשמות מכפרין כפרה גמורה ואשם תלוי אין מכפר כפרה גמורה
6 As follows: The five guilt-offerings effect complete atonement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., no other expiation is ever required.');"><sup>10</sup></span> the suspensive guilt-offering does not effect complete atonement;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the sin becomes known after the offering of this guilt-offering, an additional sin-offering is required.');"><sup>11</sup></span> thus dissenting from R'Eliezer, who holds that nebelah is subject to a suspensive guilt-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Nebelah is not subject to a sin-offering in the case of certain transgression; the suspensive guilt-offering brought for the doubt is thus its final expiation.');"><sup>12</sup></span> Rabina said: It is to be understood thus: In respect of the five guilt-offerings nothing else can take their place to effect atonement, for when it is known to him he must still bring it;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even though the Day of Atonement had intervened.');"><sup>13</sup></span> with reference to the suspensive guilt-offering.
ז ודלא כר' אליעזר דאמר אשם תלוי בא על הנבלה
7 however, something else can take its place to effect atonement, for when it is known to him he does not bring it;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the suspensive guilt-offering is no longer required, for the Day of Atonement atones for uncertain sins, though not for certain sins liable to a sin-offering.');"><sup>14</sup></span> as we have learnt: THEY THAT ARE LIABLE TO SIN-OFFERINGS OR TO UNCONDITIONAL GUILT-OFFERINGS AND THE DAY OF ATONEMENT HAD INTERVENED, ARE STILL BOUND TO OFFER THEM AFTER THE DAY OF ATONEMENT; THEY THAT ARE LIABLE TO SUSPENSIVE GUILT-OFFERINGS ARE EXEMPT.
ח רבינא אמר הכי קתני חמשה אשמות אין אחר מכפר כפרתן דכי מתיידע ליה מייתי אשם תלוי אחר מכפר כפרתו דלכי מתיידע לא מייתי כדתנן חייבי חטאות ואשמות ודאין שעבר עליהן יה"כ חייבין להביא אחר יה"כ חייבי אשמות תלויין פטורין:
8 THEY THAT ARE LIABLE TO SIN-OFFERINGS OR TO UNCONDITIONAL GUILT-OFFERINGS etc. It is stated, THEY THAT ARE LIABLE TO SIN-OFFERINGS OR TO UNCONDITIONAL GUILT-OFFERINGS AND THE DAY OF ATONEMENT HAD INTERVENED, ARE STILL BOUND TO OFFER THEM AFTER THE DAY OF ATONEMENT; THEY THAT ARE LIABLE TO SUSPENSIVE GUILT OFFERINGS ARE EXEMPT. Whence do we know this? - When Rab Dimi arrived,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., in Babylon from Palestine. He was the bearer of many a Palestinian tradition.');"><sup>15</sup></span> he said in the name of R'Ammi, who reported it in the name of R'Hanina. The verse reads, And he shall make atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, even all their sins;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 16, referring to the High Priest's atonement of the people's transgressions effected by the goat of atonement, which was offered upon the inner altar of the Temple on the Day of Atonement. In addition, the scapegoat', i.e., the goat that was removed, or made to 'escape' into the wilderness, symbolizing the removal of the guilt of the community, was also offered on this day. ohgap ohtyj');"><sup>16</sup></span> 'sins' are analogous to 'transgressions': as 'transgressions'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. 'transgressions', denotes wilful rebellious action. Such an act of apostasy is too grave to be expiated by a sacrifice. ,'sins', on the other hand, denotes unintentional deviation from the law.');"><sup>17</sup></span> are not subject to a sacrifice, so also only thos 'sins' which are not subject to a sacrifice are atoned for [by the Day of Atonement]; 'sins', however, which are subject to a sacrifice are not atoned for.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., by the Day of Atonement. The Mishnah, therefore, states that the sacrifices are still due. The suspensive guilt-offering is an exception for reasons that will be explained further on.');"><sup>18</sup></span>
ט חייבי חטאות ואשמות ודאין כו': קתני חייבי חטאות ואשמות ודאין שעבר עליהן יוה"כ חייבין להביא לאחר יה"כ חייבי אשמות תלויין פטורין מנהני מילי
9 Said Abaye to him: But this verse refers to the goat that is offered up within,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., within the Temple, upon the inner altar. This sacrifice expiates only unconscious transgressions; v. Shebu. 22.');"><sup>19</sup></span> which does not atone for the conscious transgression of a law; the scapegoat, however, which does atone for the conscious transgression of a law, I may say will atone also for sins that are subject to a sacrifice! Rather said Abaye: It is derived from the following [text]: And he shall confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, even all their sins;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. v. 21. referring to the 'scapegoat'.');"><sup>20</sup></span> 'sins' are analogous to transgressions: as transgressions' are not subject to a sacrifice, so also only those 'sins' which are not subje to a sacrifice are atoned for [by the Day of Atonement]; 'sins', however, which are subject to a sacrifice are not atoned for by it. Scripture has thus suggested a limitation [in the text] relating to the 'scapegoat', to te us that it does not atone for sins that are subject to a sacrifice.
י כי אתא רב דימי א"ר אמי א"ר חנינא אמר קרא (ויקרא טז, טז) וכפר על הקודש מטומאת בני ישראל ומפשעיהם לכל חטאתם חטאים דומיא דפשעים מה פשעים דלאו בני קרבן אף חטאים דלאו בני קרבן מכפר אבל חטאים בני קרבן לא מכפר
10 Said to him Rab Dimi: Whence do you know that the 'transgressions' referred to are those that are not subject to a sacrifice? Perhaps they are those that are subject to a sacrifice; as we have learnt: Four persons offer a sacrifice for wilful as for inadvertent transgression!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 9a. The text may allude to these four exceptional instances, thus implying that also transgressions liable to a sacrifice are expiated on the Day of Atonement.');"><sup>21</sup></span>
יא א"ל אביי והא כי כתיב הדין קרא בשעיר הנעשה בפנים הוא דכתיב דלא מכפר על עבירות דמצוה ידועה אבל שעיר המשתלח דמכפר על עבירות דמצוה ידועה אימא לך אפילו על חטאים דבני קרבן נינהו מכפר
11 In confirmation of his [Abaye's] view it was stated: When Rabin arrived,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 192, n. 1.');"><sup>22</sup></span> he said in the name of R'Jose, who reported it in the name of Resh Lakish: 'And he shall confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their sins; sins are analogous to 'transgressions': as 'transgressions' are n subject to a sacrifice, and are atoned for [by the Day of Atonement], so also only those 'sins' which are not subject to a sacrifice are atoned for by it; 'sins', however, which are subject to a sacrifice are not atoned fo it. Remarked Abaye: I, too, derived it from this text, but Rab Dimi objected: Whence do we know that the 'transgressions' referred to are those that are not subject to a sacrifice; perhaps they are those that are subj to a sacrifice, as we have learnt: Four persons offer a sacrifice for wilful as for inadvertent transgression? - Replied Rabin to him: The majority of 'transgressions' are not subject to a sacrifice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These four instances are exceptions, and it is therefore unlikely that the text alludes to them.');"><sup>23</sup></span>
יב אלא אמר אביי מהכא (ויקרא טז, כא) והתודה עליו כל עונות בני ישראל ואת כל פשעיהם לכל חטאתם חטאים דומיא דפשעים מה פשעים דלאו בני קרבן אף חטאים דלאו בני קרבן אבל חטאים דבני קרבן נינהו לא מכפר ומיעטיה קרא בשעיר המשתלח למימרא דעל חטאים דבני קרבן נינהו לא מכפר
12 Said the other to him: Does the passage mention 'majority'? - Rather, said Abaye: [The proof comes] from the beginning of this same verse: And he shall confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel. And it was taught: 'Iniquities' denote wilful transgressions, and so it is written, His iniquity shall be upon him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XV, 31. The beginning of the sentence reads, He hath despised the word of the Lord, suggesting a wilful departure from the law of God.');"><sup>24</sup></span> Now, why did the verse add, 'and all their transgressions, even all their sins';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Transgressions' is regarded as superfluous as it is included in 'iniquities'. Its mention is to indicate the analogy.');"><sup>25</sup></span>
יג א"ל רב דימי ממאי דהני פשעים לאו בני קרבן נינהו דלמא הני דבני קרבן נינהו כדתנן ארבעה מביאין על הזדון כשגגה
13 to establish an analogy to 'transgressions': as transgressions' are not subject to a sacrifice, so also only those 'sins' are implied which are not subject to a sacrifice; 'sins', however, which are subject to a sacrifice are not atoned for [by the Day Atonement]. THEY THAT ARE LIABLE TO SUSPENSIVE GUILT-OFFERINGS etc. Whence do we learn this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., that the Day of Atonement expiates doubtful sins.');"><sup>26</sup></span> - Said R'Eleazar: The Scriptural text reads, From all your sins [shall ye be clean] before the Lord:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 30. 'Before the Lord' is interpreted as a phrase qualifying 'sins' intimating that man is cleansed of all sins of which he is unaware by reason of their doubtfulness.');"><sup>27</sup></span> The Day of Atonement expiates sins that are known to the Lord alone.
יד איתמר נמי כי אתא רבין אמר ר' יוסי אמר ריש לקיש והתודה עליו את כל עונות בני ישראל ואת כל פשעיהם לכל חטאתם חטאים דומיא דפשעים מה פשעים דלאו בני קרבן מכפר אף חטאים דלאו בני קרבן מכפר אבל חטאים דבני קרבן לא מכפר
14 Said Rab Tahlifa, the father of Rab Huna, in the name of Raba: Also the preceding instance<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., that relating to sacrifices for certain sins, which has been expounded in the discussion preceding this paragraph by Abaya and R. Dimi. These expositions are regarded as unsatisfactory by reason of the above objections that were raised against them.');"><sup>28</sup></span> need no longer
טו אמר אביי אנא נמי מהדין קרא אמרי ואקשי לי רב דימי ממאי דהני פשעים דלאו בני קרבן נינהו דלמא הנך דבני קרבן נינהו כדתנן ארבעה מביאין על הזדון כשגגה אמר ליה רבין רוב פשעים לאו בני קרבן אמר ליה מידי רוב כתיב
15 
טז אלא אמר אביי מרישיה דקרא והתודה עליו את כל עונות בני ישראל ותניא עונות אלו זדונות וכן הוא אומר (במדבר טו, לא) עונה בה
16 
יז ואת כל פשעיהם לכל חטאתם כל למה לי לאקשויי לפשעים מה פשעים דלאו בני קרבן אף חטאים דלאו בני קרבן אבל חטאים דבני קרבן נינהו לא מכפר:
17 
יח חייבי אשמות תלויין כו': מנהני מילי א"ר אלעזר אמר קרא (ויקרא טז, ל) מכל חטאתיכם לפני ה' וגו' חטא שאין מכיר בו אלא המקום יום הכפורים מכפר
18 
יט אמר רב תחליפא אבוה דרב הונא בר תחליפא משמיה דרבא קדמייתא נמי לא תיתי
19