Yoma 122

אשם מצורע ששחטו שלא לשמו באנו למחלוקת ר' מאיר ור' אלעזר ור' שמעון ר' מאיר דאמר יביא אחר ויתחיל בתחילה הכא נמי יביא אחר וישחוט

R'Johanan said: If the guilt-offering of a leper had been slaughtered not for its own purpose,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [I.e., he offered it in the name of some other sacrifice. In such a case the sacrifice is valid but is not accounted to the owner in fulfillment of his duty and the owner must consequently bring anew the offering which was due from him.]');">¹</span> - therein we find a dispute between [on the one hand] R'Meir, and R'Eleazar and R'Simeon [on the other]. R'Meir, who said he must bring another one and start all over from the beginning, would here consistently hold that he must bring another [animal as] guilt-offering and slay it, whereas R'Eleazar and R'Simeon, who say: He shall start at the place he had left off before, would hold that here there is no redress.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [R. Meir, who holds that part of a service that has not been completed is of no account, would similarly regard this incomplete guilt-offering as not offered and would require another guilt-offering; whereas R. Eleazar and R. Simeon, who do not disregard that part of the service which had been performed, would hold that he cannot bring a new guilt-offering as Scripture explicitly states 'One lamb for a guilt offering' (Lev. XIV, 12) and not two.]');">²</span>

ולר' אלעזר ור' שמעון שאומרים ממקום שפסק משם הוא מתחיל הכא אין לו תקנה

R'Hisda demurred to them: Surely it is written: 'It'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIV, 12: 'And offer it as a guilt-offering', i.e., only the one which has been waved together with the oil. This unequivocal statement of the Torah R. Meir too must accept, hence the interpretation just offered is to be rejected.');">³</span> - This is a refutation. It was taught in accord with R'Johanan: If the guilt-offering of a leper had been slaughtered not for its own purpose, or if one had not sprinkled of its blood upon the thumbs and toes, it is considered a burnt-offering in regard to the altar and requires the [prescribed]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Num. XV, 1ff.');">⁴</span>

מתקיף ליה רב חסדא והא (ויקרא יד, יב) אותו כתיב קשיא

libations and he requires another guilt-offering to render him right again.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the leper becomes pure, normal again, so that he may eat holy things (sacrificial meat) . This shews that there is a view that he can bring a new guilt-offering, which supports R. Johanan.');">⁵</span> - And R'Hisda? - He will answer you: What means, he requires? - He requires, but he has no remedy [to get it]. But would a Tanna teach: 'He requires' when he has no remedy [of getting it]?

תניא כוותיה דרבי יוחנן אשם מצורע ששחטו שלא לשמו או שלא נתן מדמו לגבי בהונות הרי זה עולה לגבי מזבח וטעון נסכים וצריך אשם אחר להכשירו ורב חסדא אמר לך מאי צריך צריך ואין לו תקנה

Indeed, as it was also taught: [Concerning] a baldheaded nazirite Beth Shammai taught he requires to pass through a razor [over his head],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VI, 5: All the days of his vow of the Naziriteship there shall no razor come upon his head, until the days be fulfilled, i.e., but when the days are fulfilled he shall have his hair cut.');">⁶</span> whereas Beth Hillel said: He need not pass through a razor [over his head]. And R'Abina said: When Beth Shammai say: It is necessary, [they mean] he requires to [do so] but he has no remedy.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This bald-pate cannot do so. Yet it is stated 'he requires'.');">⁷</span>

ותני תנא צריך ואין לו תקנה אין והתניא נזיר ממורט ב"ש אומרים צריך העברת תער וב"ה אומרים אין צריך העברת תער וא"ר אבינא כשאומרים בית שמאי צריך צריך ואין לו תקנה

He thus contradicts R'Pedath, for R'Pedath said: Beth Shammai and R'Eleazar say one and the same thing.' Beth Shammai', as we have stated above, and R'Eleazar' as we have learnt:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Naz. 46b.');">⁸</span> If he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The leper.');">⁹</span>

ופליגא דר' פדת דאמר רבי פדת בית שמאי ורבי אלעזר אמרו דבר אחד בית שמאי הא דאמרן רבי אלעזר (דתניא) אין לו בוהן יד ובוהן רגל אין לו טהרה עולמית רבי אלעזר אומר נותן על מקומו ויוצא רבי שמעון אומר אם נתן על של שמאל יצא

have no thumb or toe, he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The leper.');">⁹</span> can never obtain purity. R'Eleazar said: One should place it on the place due, and thereby the duty is done.

תנו רבנן (ויקרא יד, יד) ולקח מדם האשם יכול בכלי ת"ל ונתן מה נתינה בעצמו של כהן אף לקיחה בעצמו של כהן

R'Simeon said: If he placed it on [the thumb and toe of] the right, he has done his duty. Our Rabbis taught: And the priest shall take [receive] of the blood of the guilt-offering<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIV, 14.');">¹⁰</span> - one might have assumed that is to be done with a vessel, therefore the text reads: 'And he shall put it' i.e., just as the 'putting' must be done by the priest himself, so must the 'taking' be by the priest himself.

יכול אף למזבח כן ת"ל (ויקרא יד, יג) כי כחטאת האשם הוא מה חטאת טעונה כלי אף אשם טעון כלי נמצאת אתה אומר אשם מצורע שני כהנים מקבלים את דמו אחד ביד ואחד בכלי זה שקבל בכלי בא לו אצל מזבח וזה שקיבל ביד בא לו אצל מצורע

One might have assumed the same applied to the blood which is to be used for [sprinkling upon] the altar, therefore the text reads: For as the sin-offering. so is the guilt-offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XIV, 13.');">¹¹</span> Just as a vessel is necessary [for receiving the blood of a] sin-offering,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Zeb. 97b.');">¹²</span>

תנן התם וכולן מטמאים בגדים ונשרפין אבית הדשן דברי ר"א ור' שמעון וחכמים אומרים אין מטמאין בגדים ואין נשרפין אבית הדשן אלא האחרון הואיל וגמר בו כפרה

so is a vessel necessary [for the blood of] the guilt-offering. You thus find yoursel stating that in the case of the guilt-offering of the leper two priests receive the blood thereof, one in his hand,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For sprinkling on the leper himself.');">¹³</span> the other in a vessel.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the sprinkling on the altar.');">¹⁴</span>

בעא מיניה רבא מרב נחמן כמה שעירים משלח א"ל וכי עדרו משלח אמר לו

The first who receives it in the vessel proceeds to the altar, whereas the othe who receives it in his hand goes to the leper. We have learnt there: All of them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' All the bullocks and he-goats mentioned in our Mishnah, in connection with blood poured away before the completion of the individual atonement or the whole service in question, and for which substitutes are obligatory, must be burnt outside the three camps (that of the priests, the Levites, and of Israel) and they render the garments of those occupied with burning impure. Lev. XVI, 27-28.');">¹⁵</span> render the garments levitically impure and are to be burnt in the place where the ashes are deposited. This is the opinion of R'Eleazar and R'Simeon, The Sages say: They do not render the garments ritually unclean and they are not to be burnt in the place where the ashes are deposited, except the last one because with that he completed the atonement. - Raba asked the following question of R'Nahman: How many he-goats is he to send away?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Where, for instance, the blood of the he-goat was poured away after the sprinklings in the Holy of Holies in which case he has to bring anew two goats and cast lots afresh.]');">¹⁶</span> - He answered: Should he perhaps send his flock away?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Obviously only one he-goat-to-be-sent-away is dealt with in Lev. XVI.');">¹⁷</span> - He said to him: