Yoma 113

השתא ברי טמאים אתון דכתיב (איכה א, ט) טומאתה בשוליה אמר ליה תא חזי מה כתיב בהו (ויקרא טז, טז) השוכן אתם בתוך טומאתם אפילו בזמן שהן טמאין שכינה שרויה בינהן

Now you are surely unclean, for it is written: Her filthiness was in her skirts.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lam. I, 9.');">¹</span>

וכי דבר הלמד בהיקש חוזר ומלמד בהיקש

-He answered: Come and see what is written concerning them: 'That dwelleth with them in the midst of their uncleanness',i.e., even at the time when they are unclean, the Divine Presence is among them.

האי הימנו ודבר אחר הוא ולא הוי היקש

- But may something inferred by analogy be used as basis of another by analogy?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Above (55a) we inferred the number of upward and downward sprinklings with the blood of the bullock and the he-goat respectively. Here again an attempt is made to infer through analogy the number of upward and downward sprinklings in the Sanctuary from the sprinklings in the Holy of Holies. The rule is that in the laws appertaining to sacrifices something obtained by analogy may not become the basis or source of new inference by analogy; such inference is legitimate only when based upon the Biblical text itself.');">²</span>

הניחא למאן דאמר לא הוי היקש אלא למאן דאמר הוי היקש מאי איכא למימר

- The inference here came from the subject itself for which inference was made, together with another, thus cannot be considered inference by analogy.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the primary analogy the main law prescribing upward and downward sprinklings is definitely taught in the Biblical text, both in the case of the bullock and the he-goat , it is only their number that is inferred from one another. In such a case the primary analogy may be made the basis for a further analogy. It is only when the very law itself is mentioned in one case only and then inferred through analogy for the other that no further inference by analogy may be made. If e.g., no reference had been made in the Biblical text to any upward or downward sprinkling, such regulation being based on inference from one to the other, it would then be wrong to endeavour to derive another law by analogy from the first law inferred by analogy.');">³</span>

מקומות הוא דגמרי מהדדי

This will be well in accord with the view that such inference is not inference by analogy, but what can be said according to the view that even that is inference by analogy? - Only the localities are inferred here from one another.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., whereas in the first analogy the inference was made from one animal for the other, the second is concerned in the localities - i.e., the Holy of Holies and the Temple, extending the sprinkling regulations from the former to the latter.');">⁴</span>

אי בעית אימא חוץ מבפנים בחדא זימנא גמר

Or, if you like, say: He infers the outside [sprinklings] from the inside ones simultaneously.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The second inference is not made via the animals but directly from the sprinklings within the Holy of Holies to those outside, in the Temple Proper.');">⁵</span>

תנא כשהוא מזה אינו מזה על הפרוכת אלא כנגד הפרוכת אמר ר' אלעזר בר' יוסי אני ראיתיה ברומי והיו עליה כמה טיפי דמים של פר ושעיר של יום הכפורים

It was taught: When he sprinkled, he did not sprinkle directly upon the curtain, but towards it.

ודילמא דפר העלם דבר של צבור ושעירי ע"ז הוו

R'Eliezer B'Jose said: I saw it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Me'il. 17b: R. Eliezer was in Rome and had occasion to see the holy vessels in the royal treasury, among them the curtain of the Holy of Holies.');">⁶</span>

דחזא דעבידי כסדרן ותנן נמי גבי פר העלם דבר של צבור כי האי גוונא כשהוא מזה לא היו נוגעין בפרוכת ואם נגעו נגעו

in Rome and there were upon it many drops of blood both of the bullock and the he-goat of the Day of Atonement.

אמר רבי אלעזר ברבי יוסי אני ראיתיה ברומי והיו עליה כמה טיפי דמים של פר העלם דבר של צבור ושעירי ע"ז ודילמא דפר ושעיר של יום הכפורים נינהו דחזנהו דעבידי שלא כסדרן

- Perhaps these stains were those from the [blood of] the bullock [offered up] for an error of the community,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. IV, 13 and Num. XV, 24.');">⁷</span>

נתערבו לו דמים בדמים אמר רבא נותן אחת למעלה ושבע למטה ועולה לו לכאן ולכאן

or of the goats [offered in expiation] for idolatry? - He saw that they were in their regular order.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One on top of the other, as the result of the motion of the priest, in the manner of one swinging a whip.');">⁸</span>

אמרוה קמיה דרבי ירמיה אמר בבלאי טפשאי משום דדיירי בארעא דחשוכא אמרי שמעתא דמחשכן הא קא יהיב למעלה דשעיר מקמי מטה דפר והתורה אמרה (ויקרא טז, כ) וכלה מכפר את הקדש כלה דם הפר ואחר כך כלה דם השעיר

It has also been taught<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. D.S. Cur. edd. 'We also learnt'.');">⁹</span>

אלא אמר רבי ירמיה נותן אחת למעלה ושבע למטה לשם הפר וחוזר ונותן אחת למעלה ושבע למטה לשם השעיר

in connection with the bullock offered up for an error of the community: When he sprinkled the drops were not to reach the curtain, but if they did, they just did.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' De facto it did not matter: even if the drops reached the curtain there was no cancellation of the service.');">¹⁰</span>

נתערבו לו דמים בדמים במתנות האחרונות סבר רב פפא קמיה דרבא למימר נותן שבע למטה לשם פר ולשם שעיר וחוזר ונותן אחת למעלה לשם שעיר

And R'Eleazar B'Jose said: I saw it in Rome and there were upon it many drops of blood from the bullock offered up for an error of the congregation and from the he-goats offered up for idolatry.

אמר ליה רבא עד השתא קרו לן טפשאי והשתא טפשאי דטפשאי דקא מגמרינן להו ולא גמירי והא קא יהיב מטה דשעיר מקמי מעלה דשעיר והתורה אמרה תן למעלה ואחר כך למטה

But perhaps they came from the bullock and he-goat of the Day of Atonement? - He saw that they were not in their regular order. If the blood [of the one] was mixed up with the blood [of the other],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The blood of the bullock with the blood of the he-goat.');">¹¹</span> - Raba holds, he sprinkles once upwards and seven times downwards, and it serves for both. When this was reported before R'Jeremiah, he said: Those foolish Babylonians, because they live in a dark country, they utter dark teachings.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Pes., Sonc. ed., 60b.');">¹²</span> Surely he would be giving the upward sprinkling [of the blood] of the he-goat before the downward sprinkling [of the blood] of the bullock, whereas the Torah said: And when he hath made an end of atoning for the holy place,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 20.');">¹³</span> [implying] he must complete [the sprinkling of] the blood of the bullock, then complete [the sprinkling of] the blood of the he-goat. Rather, said R'Jeremiah: He sprinkles once upward and seven times downward in the name of the bullock, and then he sprinkles once upward and seven times downward in the name of the he-goat. If the blood of one was mixed up with the blood of the other in the midst<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., after he had made the upward sprinkling with the blood of the bullock.');">¹⁴</span> of the last sprinklings, then R'Papa wanted to say before Raba, he makes seven downward sprinklings in the name of the bullock and he-goat, then makes one upward in the name of the he-goat. Said Raba to him: Now they had just called us foolish, now they might call us the most foolish of the foolish for we teach them but they learn not. Surely now he would be making the downward sprinkling [of the blood] of the he-goat before the upward sprinkling [of the blood] of the he-goat, whereas the Torah said: Sprinkle first upward, then downward.