Yoma 72

בלאו דנבילה קא מיפלגי

They differ concerning the prohibition of carrion,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Carrion-an animal that has died a natural death; also whatever has become unfit through faulty slaughtering.');">¹</span> R'Akiba holding it to be a proper prohibition,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [For which lashes are inflicted, and for which a burnt-offering does not atone.]');">²</span>

ר"ע סבר לאו מעליא הוא ורבי יוסי הגלילי סבר לאו לאו מעליא הוא

whilst R'Jose the Galilean does not consider it a proper prohibition.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because once one has eaten the carrion, it is no more possible to sell it to the stranger or give it to the sojourner as prescribed in Deut. XIV, 21, R. Akiba holding it a proper prohibition, for the transgression of which one would be punished with the prescribed thirty-nine lashes, the fact that one cannot repair the transgression notwithstanding. According to R. Jose no such punishment would here be inflicted, hence it is not a proper prohibition.');">³</span> Abaye said: Everybody agrees that the prohibition of carrion is a proper prohibition, what they differ in is the laws touching 'Thou shalt leave',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither gather the fallen fruit of thy vineyard. Thou shalt leave them for the poor and for the stranger.');">⁴</span>

אביי אמר דכ"ע לאו דנבילה לאו מעליא הוי והכא בתעזוב קא מיפלגי

R'Akiba holding 'Thou shalt leave' means from the very beginning,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. next note.');">⁵</span> whilst R'Jose the Galilean holds it means 'now'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Here is another instance of a prohibition transformed into a command: Thou shalt not glean . . thou shalt leave them. R. Akiba holds the positive commandment is enjoined from the very first, that is, thus: do not glean but leave; hence it is not a prohibition transformed into a command, but a command from the beginning; whilst R. Jose assumes that it is a de facto command: Don't glean, but having gleaned, undo your transgression by leaving it etc.');">⁶</span>

דרבי עקיבא סבר תעזוב מעיקרא משמע ורבי יוסי הגלילי סבר השתא משמע

Our Rabbis taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. Yoma, II, 1.');">⁷</span> How does he make confession: I have done wrong, I have transgressed I have sinned - Similarly, in connection with the he-goat to be sent away Scripture says: And he shall confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions even in their sins.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 21.');">⁸</span>

ת"ר כיצד מתודה עויתי פשעתי וחטאתי וכן בשעיר המשתלח הוא אומר (ויקרא טז, כא) והתודה עליו את כל עונות בני ישראל ואת כל פשעיהם לכל חטאתם וכן במשה הוא אומר (שמות לד, ז) נושא עון ופשע וחטאה דברי ר' מאיר וחכ"א עונות אלו הזדונות וכן הוא אומר (במדבר טו, לא) הכרת תכרת הנפש ההיא עונה בה

Similarly, with Moses, it says: Forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXXIV, 7.');">⁹</span> - these are the words of R'Meir.

פשעים אלו המרדים וכן הוא אומר (מלכים ב ג, ז) מלך מואב פשע בי ואומר (מלכים ב ח, כב) אז תפשע לבנה בעת ההיא לכל חטאתם אלו השגגות וכן הוא אומר (ויקרא ד, ב) נפש כי תחטא בשגגה ומאחר שהתודה על הזדונות ועל המרדים חוזר ומתודה על השגגות

The Sages, however, say: 'Wrongs' are deliberate misdeeds, thus also does Scripture say: That soul shall be utterly cut off, his wrong shall be upon him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XV, 31.');">¹⁰</span> 'transgressions' are rebellious deeds, as it is said: The King of Moab hath transgressed against me;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Kings III, 7.');">¹¹</span>

אלא כך היה מתודה חטאתי ועויתי ופשעתי לפניך אני וביתי וכו' וכן בדוד הוא אומר (תהלים קו, ו) חטאנו עם אבותינו העוינו הרשענו וכן בשלמה הוא אומר (מלכים א ח, מז) חטאנו (והרשענו ומרדנו) וכן בדניאל הוא אומר (דניאל ט, ה) חטאנו (והעוינו) והרשענו ומרדנו אלא מהו שאמר משה נושא עון ופשע וחטאה אמר משה לפני הקב"ה רבש"ע בשעה שישראל חוטאין לפניך ועושין תשובה עשה להם זדונות כשגגות

furthermore: Then did Libnah transgress at the same time; 'sins'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. VIII, 22.');">¹²</span> are inadvertent omissions, as it is said: If any one shall sin through error.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. IV, 2.');">¹³</span>

אמר רבה בר שמואל אמר רב הלכה כדברי חכמים פשיטא יחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים מהו דתימא מסתבר טעמיה דר' מאיר דקמסייע ליה קרא דמשה קמ"ל

- Should he then, after having confessed the deliberate misdeeds and the rebellious deeds, turn back and confess inadvertent omissions?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is illogical to ask forgiveness for the gravest offences first and then for the lighter ones.');">¹⁴</span> Rather, thus did he make confession: I have sinned, I have done wrong, I have transgressed before Thee, I and my house etc. Thus also does Scripture say in connection with David: We have sinned with our fathers, we have done wrong, we have dealt wickedly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ps. CVI, 6.');">¹⁵</span>

ההוא דנחית קמיה דרבה ועבד כר"מ א"ל שבקת רבנן ועבדת כר"מ א"ל כר"מ סבירא לי כדכתיב בספר אורייתא דמשה

Thus also with Solomon: We have sinned, and have done wrong, we have dealt wickedly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Kings VIII, 47.');">¹⁶</span> Thus also with Daniel: We have sinned, and have dealt wrong, and have done wickedly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Dan. IX, 5. In all these cases the logical order is maintained, forgiveness being asked, first, for the sins due to inadvertence, then for those deliberate misdeeds, at last for rebellious acts.');">¹⁷</span>

ת"ר וכפר בכפרת דברים הכתוב מדבר אתה אומר בכפרת דברים או אינו אלא כפרת דמים

- What is the meaning, then, of Moses' saying: 'Forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the order appears reversed.');">¹⁸</span> Moses said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Lord of the Universe, when Israel sin before Thee and then do penance, account their premeditated sins as errors! Rabbah B'Samuel said in the name of Rab: The halachah is in accord with the Sages.

הרי אני דן נאמרה כאן כפרה ונאמרה להלן כפרה מה כפרה האמורה בשעיר דברים אף כפרה האמורה בפר דברים

But [that is] self-evident, for 'Where the opinion of one individual is opposed to the opinion of a majority, the law follows the majority'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ber. 9" .');"="">¹⁹</span> - You might have said: The reason of R'Meir appears more logical because the scriptural verse of Moses<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which agrees, as to the order, with R. Meir.');">²⁰</span>

ואם נפשך לומר הרי הוא אומר (ויקרא טז, ו) והקריב אהרן את פר החטאת אשר לו וכפר בעדו ובעד ביתו ועדיין לא נשחט הפר

supports it, therefore we are taught [as above]. Once a man went down<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the prayer desk.');">²¹</span>

מאי ואם נפשך לומר וכי תימא נילף משעיר הנעשה בפנים שכפרתו בדמים הרי הוא אומר וכפר ועדיין לא נשחט הפר

before Rabbah and arranged his prayer in accord with R'Meir's view. He said to him: Do you forsake the Sages and act like R'Meir? - He answered: I hold as R'Meir, for thus it is written in the Torah of Moses. Our Rabbis taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Meg. 20b.');">²²</span> And shall make atonement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 11.');">²³</span> - Scripture speaks of atonement through words.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., confession.');">²⁴</span> You say it refers to atonement through words. But perhaps it refers to atonement [obtained] through [sacrificial] blood? I infer it thus: Here 'atonement is mentioned and there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In connection with the he-goat that is sent away. Lev. XVI, 10.');">²⁵</span> 'atonement' is mentioned - Just as the atonement mentioned in connection with the he-goat is one through words, so the atonement mentioned with the bullock is one obtained through words. And if you wish to argue against it, then [learn from]: And Aaron shall present the bullock for the sin-offering, which is for himself and shall make atonement for himself and for his house,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 11.');">²³</span> yet the bullock has not been slaughtered!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then is atonement possible? It can be obtained through confession.');">²⁶</span> What does 'And if you wish to argue against it' imply? - This: And if you would say: Let us infer from the he-goat prepared within the Temple, the atonement of which is obtained through blood, behold [against that argument] Scripture says: 'And he shall make atonement', and the bullock has not been slaughtered yet!