Yoma 114

אלא אמר רבא נותן שבע למטה לשם פר וחוזר ונותן אחת למעלה ושבע למטה לשם שעיר

Rather, said Raba, he makes seven downward sprinklings in the name of the bullock, then makes one upward and seven downward sprinklings in the name of the he-goat.

נתערבו לו כוסות בכוסות נותן וחוזר ונותן

If the cups [of blood] have become confused,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The priest not knowing which of the cups contained the blood of the bullock and which the blood of the he-goat.');">¹</span>

וחוזר ונותן שלשה פעמים

then he sprinkles, and sprinkles again, and sprinkles once more, three times.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In each case he makes one sprinkling upward and seven downward from one cup then again from the second cup, finally again from the first cup, so that in any case the blood of the bullock would have been sprinkled before that of the he-goat. For, if the first cup was actually that containing the bullock's blood, and the second that containing the he-goat's blood, he has fulfilled his duty properly, with the first and second series of sprinklings. If, however, the first cup happened to be that of the he-goat, then such sprinkling was of no avail, and the second cup being that containing the bullock's blood and the third again the one containing the he-goat's blood, are in order and the service is performed in accord with the regulations which postulate that the sprinklings made with the bullock's blood came first.');">²</span>

מקצת דמים נתערבו לו ומקצת דמים לא נתערבו [לו] פשיטא כי יהיב מודאין יהיב

If part<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As e.g., when the blood contained in two cups was poured into a third, so that each of the two cups contained a quantity of blood.');">³</span>

מיהו הנך שירים הוו וליסוד אזלי או דילמא דחויין הוו ואזלי לאמה

of the blood became mixed up and part not, then obviously when he makes the sprinklings he makes them from that part which is definitely known [to be unmixed]; but as for the other,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The mixed blood in the third cup.');">⁴</span>

אמר רב פפא אפילו למאן דאמר כוס אחד עושה חבירו שירים הני מילי היכא דאי בעי למיתב מצי יהיב אבל האי דאי בעי למיתב לא מצי יהיב לא

is it to be considered a remainder and must thus be poured out at the base<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Zeb. 47a: the remaining blood was poured over the western base of the outer altar.');">⁵</span>

אמר ליה רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לרב פפא אדרבה אפילו למאן דאמר כוס אחד עושה חבירו דחוי הני מילי דדחייה בידים אבל היכא דלא דחייה בידים לא

of the altar, or is it to be considered 'rejected' [from sacred use] and must be poured into the canal?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., since the sprinklings did not come from it, shall the blood be relegated, together with all waste of the Temple Court, through the canal, to the brook of Kidron.');">⁶</span>

דתניא למעלה הוא אומר (ויקרא ד, כה) ואת דמו ישפוך ולמטה הוא אומר (ויקרא ד, ל) ואת כל דמה ישפוך

- R'Papa said: Even according to the view that one cup renders the other a remainder,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whenever the priest has received the blood in two cups but has sprinkled from one only, the blood in the other cup is poured out over the base of the altar.');">⁷</span>

מניין לחטאת שקבל דמה בארבע כוסות ונתן מזה אחת ומזה אחת שכולן נשפכין ליסוד ת"ל (ויקרא ד, ל) ואת כל דמה ישפוך

that applies only where he could make the sprinklings if he wanted to do so but in this case,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where part of the blood of the two cups was poured into a third.');">⁸</span>

יכול אפילו נתן ארבע מתנות מאחת מהן ת"ל ואת דמו ישפוך הוא נשפך ליסוד והן נשפכין לאמה רבי אליעזר בר"ש אומר מניין לחטאת שקבל דמה בארבע כוסות ונתן ארבע מתנות מאחד מהן שכולן נשפכין ליסוד ת"ל ואת כל דמה ישפוך

even if he so desired, he would be unable to make the sprinkling.

ולרבי אליעזר בר"ש הא כתיב ואת דמו ישפוך אמר רב אשי למעוטי שירים שבצואר בהמה

R'Huna the son of R'Joshua said to R'Papa: On the contrary! Even according to the view that one cup renders the other 'rejected', that applies only if he rejected it with his hands [deliberately], but where he had not rejected it with his hands it would not apply?

עירה דם הפר לתוך דם השעיר תנן כמאן דאמר מערבין לקרנות דאיתמר רבי יאשיה ורבי יונתן חד אמר מערבין וחד אמר אין מערבין

For it has been taught: Above it is said: And the remaining blood thereof shall he pour out,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. IV, 25.');">⁹</span>

תסתיים דר' יאשיה הוא דאמר מערבין דאמר אע"ג דלא כתיב יחדיו כמאן דכתיב יחדיו דמי

and below: And all the remaining blood thereof shall he pour out.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. v, 34.');">¹⁰</span>

אפילו תימא רבי יונתן הוא שאני הכא דכתיב אחת

Whence do we know that, in the case of a sin-offering, if he had received the blood in four cups and sprinkled from each one cup thereof<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The blood of the sin-offering was sprinkled upon the four corners of the altar.');">¹¹</span>

תניא דלא כשנויין (ויקרא טז, יח) ולקח מדם הפר ומדם השעיר שיהיו מעורבין דברי רבי יאשיה

one sprinkling, all the remaining blood must be poured out at the base? To teach us that Scripture said: 'And all the remaining blood thereof shall he pour out'. One might have assumed that even if he made the four sprinklings from one of the [cups], to teach us correctly, Scripture said: 'And the remaining blood thereof shall he pour out' i.e., only this is to be poured out at the base but they [the rest] are to be poured into the canal. R'Eliezer son of R'Simeon said: Whence do we know that if he received the blood of a sin-offering in four cups and made the four sprinklings from one of them, that they must all be poured out at the base? To teach us that Scripture said: 'And all the remaining blood thereof shall he pour out'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus we see that the first Tanna treats the blood in the cup or cups from which no sprinkling has been made as rejected, to be poured out in the canal, whereas R. Eliezer b. R. Simeon treats it as the remainder, to be poured out over the base.');">¹²</span> But according to R'Eliezer son of R'Simeon is it not written: 'And the remaining blood thereof shall he pour out'? - R'Ashi said: This is meant to exclude the [blood that] remains in the neck of the animal. HE POURED THE BLOOD OF THE BULLOCK INTO THE BLOOD OF THE HE-GOAT: We were taught in accordance with the view that one mixed [the blood] to sprinkle upon the horns [of the inner altar], for it has been said: R'Josaia and R'Jonathan [were disputing], one said: One mixed [the bloods], the other one did not do so. It may be ascertained that it is R'Josaia who held that one mixed [the bloods]; for he said: Although Scripture does not state: 'together',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Sanh. ');">¹³</span> is it not written: it is as if 'together' were written. You mig also say that it is R'Jonathan, but here it is different, because Scripture states 'once'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXX, 10. And Aaron shall make atonement upon the horns of it once (a year) . The word is here interpreted to mean that one sprinkling is to be made of the blood of both animals.');">¹⁴</span> It has been taught contrary to this, our reply: 'And he shall take of the blood of the bullock and of the blood of the goat'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 18.');">¹⁵</span> i.e., that they are to be mixed. This is the view of R'Josaia.