Shevuot 24

קיץ כבנות שוח למזבח והכתיב (ויקרא ב, יא) כי כל שאור וכל דבש וגו' תני רב חנינא כבנות שוח לאדם

Dessert like white figs<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Ber. 40b.');">¹</span> for the altar.

דרש ר"נ בר רב חסדא אין מקיצין בעולת העוף אמר רבא הא בורכא א"ל ר"נ בר יצחק לרבא מאי בורכתא אנא אמריתה ניהליה ומשמיה דרב שימי מנהרדעא אמריתה ניהליה דאמר רב שימי מנהרדעא מותרות לנדבת צבור אזלי ואין עולת עוף בצבור

But it is written: For any leaven or honey ye shall not offer up as smok as an offering made by fire unto the Lord?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 11. Any sweet fruit juice is called honey. (Rashi, a.l.) How, then, can you use the expression like white figs for the altar?');">²</span> - R'Hanina explained: [The burnt-offerings are dessert for the altar] as white figs are [dessert] for man.

ואף שמואל סבר להא דר' יוחנן דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל קרבנות צבור סכין מושכתן למה שהן

R'Nahman son of R'Hisda expounded: A burnt-offering of a bird is not offered as dessert for the altar.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The money obtained from selling superfluous congregational sin-offerings or individual guilt-offerings is not expended on buying a turtle-dove or young pigeon to be offered as dessert for the altar.');">³</span> Raba said: This is an absurdity! Said R'Nahman B'Isaac to Raba: Wherein lies its absurdity?

תניא נמי הכי ומודה ר"ש בשעיר שאם לא קרב ברגל יקרב בר"ה ואם לא קרב בר"ח יקרב ביוה"כ ואם לא קרב ביוה"כ יקרב ברגל ואם לא קרב ברגל זה יקרב ברגל אחר שמתחלתו לא בא אלא לכפר על מזבח החיצון

I told it him; and in the name of R'Shimi of Nehardea I told it him; for R'Shimi of Nehardea said: The surplus offerings are utilised as congregational donations;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the money obtained from their sale is used for providing burnt-offerings as dessert for the altar on behalf of the congregation.');">⁴</span> and a burnt-offering of a bird cannot be a congregational burnt offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. I, 14: He shall bring his offering of turtle-doves or of young pigeons. His offering: an individual may bring a bird as an offering, but not a congregation. (Sifra.)');">⁵</span>

(תנא לא הוקדש אלא לכפר על מזבח החיצון):

And Samuel also agrees with R'Johanan,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 12a, that, according to R. Simeon, the surplus of regular offerings are used as dessert for the altar; and, according to the Rabbis, they are redeemed unblemished, and are re-bought to be sacrificed as regular offerings in the coming year; so that, both according to R. Simeon and the Rabbis, the regular offerings themselves are sacrificed, and they need not be put to pasture till they become blemished.');">⁶</span> for Rab Judah said that Samuel said: In the case of congregational offerings, it is the knife that draws them to what they are.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is the slaughtering knife, or, in other words, the moment of slaughter, that determines their purpose. Before they are slaughtered, however, they may be changed, according to R. Simeon, from one type of offering to another, e.g., from regular burnt-offerings to dessert (also burnt-offerings) ; and, according to the Rabbis who hold that the Beth din have the power to make a mental stipulation, the year's surplus of regular offerings may be redeemed unblemished, and later re-bought and sacrificed as regular offerings in the coming year. V. Rabbenu Hananel and Tosaf. a.l.; Zeb. 6b, Rashi and Tosaf.');">⁷</span>

"ועל זדון טומאת מקדש וקדשיו שעיר הנעשה בפנים כו'" מנהני מילי

It has also been taught likewise:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Confirmation of Samuel's statement that congregational offerings are drawn by the knife to be what they are; and that even R. Simeon holds this view. The Rabbis obviously hold this view, for they say the Beth din have the power to stipulate that the surplus regular offerings may be redeemed unblemished; but even R. Simeon, who disagrees with them, nevertheless holds that an offering which was set apart for one purpose may be sacrificed for a similar purpose, for be holds that the goats of all the festivals, New Moon, and Day of Atonement, are interchangeable, because they are all at least equal in that they are offered on the outer altar to bring atonement for transgressions of the laws of uncleanness connected with the Temple and holy food; and he would therefore similarly hold that the surplus regular offerings may be offered as dessert, because regular offerings and dessert are both at least equal in that they are both burnt-offerings; and it is at the moment of slaughter that their purpose is fixed.');">⁸</span> And R'Simeon admits that the goat which was not offered on a festival may be offered on the New Moon; and if it was not offered on the New Moon, it may be offered on the Day of Atonement; and if it was not offered on the Day of Atonement, it may be offered on a festival; and if it was not offered on this festival, it may be offered on another festival; for it was originally intended only to make atonement on the outer altar.

דת"ר (ויקרא טז, טז) וכפר על הקדש מטומאות בני ישראל וגו' פשעים אלו המרדים וכן הוא אומר (מלכים ב ג, ז) מלך מואב פשע בי ואומר (מלכים ב ח, כב) אז תפשע לבנה בעת ההיא חטאות אלו השגגות וכן הוא אומר (ויקרא ד, ב) נפש כי תחטא בשגגה:

AND FOR WILFUL TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAWS OF UNCLEANNESS IN CONNECTION WITH THE TEMPLE AND HOLY FOOD THEREOF THE GOAT OFFERED WITHIN [THE VEIL] AND THE DAY OF ATONEMENT ITSELF BRING ATONEMENT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 2b.');">⁹</span> How do we know this?

"על שאר עבירות שבתורה הקלות והחמורות הזדונות והשגגות כו'"

For our Rabbis learnt. [Scripture says:] And he shall make atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleannesses of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, even all their sins:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 16; with the inner goat (verse 15) .');">¹⁰</span>

היינו קלות היינו עשה ולא תעשה חמורות היינו כריתות ומיתות ב"ד הודע היינו מזיד לא הודע היינו שוגג

Transgressions mean rebellious acts,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., wilful transgressions. gap');">¹¹</span> and thus it says, The king of Moab hath rebelled against me;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Kings III, 7. The word used, , is from the same root as that which is used in Lev. XVI, 16, and translated transgressions. gap');">¹²</span>

אמר רב יהודה ה"ק על שאר עבירות שבתורה בין קלות בין חמורות בין שעשאן בשוגג בין שעשאן במזיד אותן שעשאן בשוגג בין נודע לו ספיקן בין לא נודע לו ספיקן ואלו הן קלות עשה ולא תעשה ואלו הן חמורות כריתות ומיתות ב"ד

and also, Then did Libnah revolt at the same time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. VIII, 22. The same root, , is here also used for revolt. tyj');">¹³</span> Sins mean unwitting sins, and thus it says: If any one shall sin through error.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. IV, 2. The word used for sin is from the same root, , as that which is used for sins in Lev. XVI, 16.');">¹⁴</span>

האי עשה ה"ד אי דלא עבד תשובה (משלי כא, כז) זבח רשעים תועבה אי דעבד תשובה כל יומא נמי דתניא עבר על מצות עשה ועשה תשובה לא זז משם עד שמוחלין לו

FOR OTHER TRANSGRESSIONS OF THE TORAH, LIGHT AND HEAVY, WILFUL AND UNWITTING, KNOWN AND UNKNOWN, POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE, THOSE PUNISHABLE BY KARETH AND THOSE PUNISHABLE BY DEATH AT THE HAND OF THE BETH DIN FOR ALL THESE THE SCAPEGOAT BRINGS ATONEMENT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 2b.');">¹⁵</span> Surely LIGHT is equivalent to POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE; HEAVY is equivalent to THOSE PUNISHABLE BY KARETH AND THOSE PUNISHABLE BY DEATH AT THE HAND OF THE BETH DIN; KNOWN is equivalent to WILFUL; and UNKNOWN is equivalent to in UNWITTING!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Then why the repetition?');">¹⁶</span>

אמר רבי זירא

- Rab Judah said: Thus he means:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The latter half is explanatory of the former half: POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE is explanatory of LIGHT, and KARETH AND DEATH is explanatory of HEAVY. And both light and heavy transgressions whether committed wilfully or unwittingly are atoned for by the scapegoat. KNOWN AND UNKNOWN is an amplification of UNWITTING. ckj inua');">¹⁷</span> For other transgressions of the Torah, whether light or heavy, whether committed unwittingly or wilfully - those committed unwittingly, whether their doubtful commission<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, for example, he ate one of two pieces of fat, one of which was prohibited fat ( , Lev. III, 3, 4) , and the other permitted fat () ; and huk, oat he is in doubt as to which of the two he ate, he would normally have to bring a guilt-offering for a doubtful sin ( , v. Lev. V, 17, 18, Rashi) . Whether he became aware or not of the doubtful commission of this sin before the Day of Atonement, and if he had not yet brought his offering, he need not bring it after the Day of Atonement, for the scapegoat had atoned for it (Ker. 25a-b) .');">¹⁸</span> was known to him or not known to him; and these are the light transgressions: positive and negative; and these are the heavy transgressions: those punishable by kareth and those punishable by death at the hand of the Beth din. That positive precept [for transgression of which the scapegoat atones] - how is this [to be understood]? If he did not repent, [why should the scapegoat atone? Surely it is written:] The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. XXI, 27.');">¹⁹</span> If he did repent, [why do we require the scapegoat? Repentance on] any day avails, for it was taught: If he transgressed a positive precept and repented, he does not move from there until he is forgiven!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Yoma 86a.');">²⁰</span> - R'Zera said: