## Shevuot Daf 9b

###### Shevuot 9b:1
[Shevuot 9b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:1)

הָא גָּמְרִינַן רֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ מִדְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים וְלָא פָּרְכִינַן; הָתָם – כַּפָּרָה מִיכְתָּב כְּתִיבָא, גַּלּוֹיֵי מִילְּתָא בְּעָלְמָא הוּא; אֲבָל הָכָא – אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר כּוּלַּהּ מִילְּתָא לָא גָּמְרִינַן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Don’t we derive** the atonement of the goat of the **New Moon through** a comparison to the goat **of Yom Kippur and we did not refute it** by saying that the atonement of the goat of Yom Kippur is more extensive, that is not relevant: **There,** with regard to the goat of the New Moon, the basic fact that it provides **atonement is written** in the verse, as Rav Yehuda explains above, and the comparison to the goat of Yom Kippur is **merely revealing a matter,** i.e., it teaches in what way its atonement is limited. **But here,** with regard to the goats of the Festivals, the verse does not mention any details about atonement, so **it is** valid **to say** that **we do not derive the entire matter** from the comparison to the goat of Yom Kippur, as it provides a more extensive atonement.


###### Shevuot 9b:2
[Shevuot 9b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:2)

אֶלָּא כִּדְאָמַר רַבִּי חָמָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: ״שְׂעִיר״–״וּשְׂעִיר״; הָכָא נָמֵי ״שְׂעִיר״–״וּשְׂעִיר״, וְאִיתַּקּוּשׁ שְׂעִירֵי רְגָלִים לִשְׂעִירֵי רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים; מַה שְׂעִירֵי רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים אֵינָן מְכַפְּרִין אֶלָּא עַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה לֹא בַּתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא בַּסּוֹף, אַף שְׂעִירֵי הָרְגָלִים אֵינָן מְכַפְּרִין אֶלָּא עַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה לֹא בַּתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא בַּסּוֹף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the atonement of the goats of the Festivals is derived just **as Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says** in explanation of the opinion of Rabbi Meir (10a): The matter is derived from the fact that with regard to the goat of the Festivals (see Numbers, chapters 28–29) the verses that mention the goat could have simply stated: **A goat,** but instead state: **“And a goat.” Here too,** the fact that the verse could have simply stated: **A goat,** but instead states: **“And a goat,”** indicates that the **goats of** the **Festivals are juxtaposed with** the **goat of the New Moon,** which are mentioned at the beginning of that passage, and teaches that they all effect a similar atonement. **Just as** the **goats of** the **New Moon atone only for** cases **in which** one **did not have awareness, neither at the beginning nor at the end, so too,** the **goats of the Festivals atone only for** cases **in which** one **did not have awareness, neither at the beginning nor at the end.**


###### Shevuot 9b:3
[Shevuot 9b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:3)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: כִּי אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה עַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה לֹא בַּתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא בַּסּוֹף – הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּחֵטְא שֶׁאֵין סוֹפוֹ לִיוָּדַע, אֲבָל חֵטְא שֶׁסּוֹפוֹ לִיוָּדַע – כְּמִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ יְדִיעָה בַּסּוֹף דָּמֵי, וְשָׂעִיר הַנַּעֲשֶׂה בַּחוּץ וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְכַפֵּר; אוֹ דִלְמָא אֲפִילּוּ חֵטְא שֶׁסּוֹפוֹ לִיוָּדַע – הַשְׁתָּא מִיהָא, חֵטְא שֶׁאֵין מַכִּיר בּוֹ אֶלָּא ה׳ קָרֵינָא בֵּיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: **When Rabbi Yehuda says** that the goats of the New Moons and the Festivals atone **for** cases **in which** one **did not have awareness, neither at the beginning nor at the end,** does **that statement** apply only **to a sin that will never eventually become known,** e.g., where no one was present when the person became ritually impure, **but** with regard to **a sin that will eventually become known,** it is considered to be **like** a case of **one who has awareness** of his sin **at the end, and** therefore only the **goat whose** blood presentation is **performed outside** the Sanctuary **and Yom Kippur** itself **atone** for it? **Or perhaps, even** with regard to **a sin that will eventually become known,** right **now, at least,** before it becomes known, **I can call it a sin of which only God is aware,** and therefore the goats of the New Moons and the Festivals atone for it.


###### Shevuot 9b:4
[Shevuot 9b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:4)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתַנְיָא: עַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה לֹא בַּתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא בַּסּוֹף, וְחֵטְא שֶׁסּוֹפוֹ לִיוָּדַע – שְׂעִירֵי הָרְגָלִים וּשְׂעִירֵי רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים מְכַפְּרִים. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes: **Come** and **hear** a resolution of this dilemma, **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **For** a case **in which** one **did not have awareness, neither at the beginning nor at the end, and** it is **a sin that will eventually become known,** the **goats of the Festivals and** the **goats of** the **New Moons atone.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Shevuot 9b:5
[Shevuot 9b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:5)

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: שְׂעִירֵי הָרְגָלִים מְכַפְּרִין, אֲבָל לֹא שְׂעִירֵי רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים וְכוּ׳.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **Rabbi Shimon says:** The **goats of the Festivals atone** for a case in which one never had awareness of his transgression, **but** the **goats of** the **New Moons** do **not.** Rather, the latter atone for a ritually pure person who unwittingly partook of ritually impure sacrificial food.


###### Shevuot 9b:6
[Shevuot 9b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:6)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא: מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן? אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְאֹתָהּ נָתַן לָכֶם לָשֵׂאת אֶת עֲוֹן הָעֵדָה״, וְהַאי קְרָא בְּשָׂעִיר דְּרֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ כְּתִיב; וְיָלֵיף ״עָוֹן״–״עָוֹן״ מִצִּיץ – נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״עֲוֹן״, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן ״עֲוֹן״; מָה לְהַלָּן טוּמְאַת בָּשָׂר, אַף כָּאן טוּמְאַת בָּשָׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **Rabbi Elazar says** that **Rabbi Oshaya says: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Shimon? The verse states: “And He gave it to you to bear the sin of the congregation”** (Leviticus 10:17), **and this verse is written with regard to** the **goat of** the **New Moon. And** its capacity to atone **is derived from the frontplate** through a verbal analogy between the words **“sin”** in this verse, and the word **“sin”** stated with regard to the frontplate. The verse there states: “And it shall be on Aaron’s forehead and Aaron will bear the sin of the sacred offerings” (Exodus 28:38). The verbal analogy teaches as follows: **It is stated here,** with regard to the goat of the New Moon: **“Sin,” and it is stated there,** with regard to the frontplate: **“Sin.” Just as there,** in the verse in Exodus, the atonement is for a sin involving the **ritual impurity of** sacrificial **meat,** i.e., where such meat is placed on the altar, **so too here,** in the verse in Leviticus, the atonement is for a sin involving the **ritual impurity of** sacrificial **meat,** i.e., where a ritually pure person partakes of it.


###### Shevuot 9b:7
[Shevuot 9b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:7)

אִי מָה לְהַלָּן עוֹלִין, אַף כָּאן עוֹלִין?! ״עֲוֹן הָעֵדָה״ כְּתִיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If** the two cases are to be compared, then one could take the comparison further: **Just as there,** in the verse in Exodus, the atonement is only for meat that **ascends** upon the altar, **so too here,** in the verse in Leviticus, the atonement is only for meat that **ascends** upon the altar. The Gemara rejects this suggestion: It **is written** with regard to the goat of the New Moon: “To bear **the sin of the congregation.”** This indicates that it atones for the personal sin of partaking of sacrificial meat that was to be consumed by an individual, which became ritually impure.


###### Shevuot 9b:8
[Shevuot 9b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:8)

מִכְּדֵי מִיגְמָר גָּמְרִי מֵהֲדָדֵי; נְכַפַּר דְּרֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ אַדִּידֵיהּ וְאַדְּצִיץ – נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ לְהֵיכָא דְּנִשְׁבַּר הַצִּיץ! אָמַר קְרָא: ״עֲוֹן״ – עָוֹן אֶחָד הוּא נוֹשֵׂא, וְאֵין נוֹשֵׂא שְׁנֵי עֲוֹנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Now,** the atonement of the goats of the New Moon and that of the frontplate **are derived from one another** by a verbal analogy. If so, **let** the goat **of** the **New Moon atone for itself,** i.e., for the cases that it normally atones for, **and for that which the frontplate** normally atones for, and the practical **difference** will be in a case **where the frontplate was broken.** The Gemara answers: **The verse states** with regard to the goat of the New Moon: “To bear **the sin** of the congregation,” which indicates that **it bears,** i.e., atones for, only **one sin, but** it **does not bear two sins.**


###### Shevuot 9b:9
[Shevuot 9b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:9)

וּנְכַפַּר צִיץ אַדִּידֵיהּ וְאַדְּרֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ – נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ לְטוּמְאָה דְּאֵירְעָה בֵּין זֶה לְזֶה! אָמַר קְרָא: ״אוֹתָהּ״ – אוֹתָהּ נוֹשֵׂא עָוֹן, וְאֵין אַחֶרֶת נוֹשֵׂא עָוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **But let** the **frontplate atone for itself,** i.e., for those cases that it normally atones for, **and for** that which the goats **of** the **New Moon** normally atone for, and the practical **difference** will be in a case of the **defiling** of the Temple or its sacrificial foods **that occurred between** the goat offering of **this** New Moon **and that** New Moon which follows. The Gemara answers: **The verse states** with regard to the goat of the New Moon: “And He gave **it** to you to bear the sin of the congregation,” which indicates that **it bears,** i.e., atones for, that **sin, but another does not bear** that **sin.**


###### Shevuot 9b:10
[Shevuot 9b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:10)

רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: כְּתִיב הָכָא ״עֲוֹן הָעֵדָה״ – עֵדָה וְלֹא קָדָשִׁים, וְהָתָם כְּתִיב ״עֲוֹן הַקֳּדָשִׁים״ – קָדָשִׁים וְלֹא עֵדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi states** another proof for the opinion that each atones in a different case: **It is stated here** with regard to the goat of the New Moon: **“The sin of the congregation,”** which indicates that it atones for the sin of the **congregation, but not** for **the** sin involving **sacred offerings. And there,** with regard to the frontplate, **it is written: “The sin of the sacred offerings,”** which indicates that it atones for the sin involving **sacred offerings, but not** for the sin of the **congregation.**


###### Shevuot 9b:11
[Shevuot 9b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:11)

אַשְׁכְּחַן שְׂעִירֵי רָאשֵׁי חֳדָשִׁים דִּמְכַפְּרִי עַל טָהוֹר שֶׁאָכַל אֶת הַטָּמֵא; שְׂעִירֵי רְגָלִים דִּמְכַפְּרִי עַל שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יְדִיעָה לֹא בַּתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא בַּסּוֹף – מְנָלַן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara says: **We found** a source for Rabbi Shimon’s opinion about the **goats of** the **New Moons, that they atone for a ritually pure** person **who partook of ritually impure** sacrificial food. **From where do we** derive his opinion about the **goats of** the **Festivals, that they atone for** cases of the defiling of the Temple or its sacrificial foods **in which** one **did not have awareness, neither at the beginning nor at the end?**


###### Shevuot 9b:12
[Shevuot 9b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/9b:12)

כִּדְאָמַר רַבִּי חָמָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: ״שְׂעִיר״–״וּשְׂעִיר״, הָכָא נָמֵי ״שְׂעִיר״–״וּשְׂעִיר״,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It is derived just **as Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says,** in explanation of the opinion of Rabbi Meir (10a): The fact that with regard to the goat of the Festivals the verses that mention the goats could have simply stated: **A goat,** but instead state: **“And a goat,”** teaches that the goats of the Festivals effect an atonement similar to that of the goat of the New Moon that is mentioned at the beginning of that passage. **Here too,** the fact that the verse could have simply stated: **A goat,** but instead states: **“And a goat,”** teaches that the goats of the Festivals effect an atonement similar to that of the goat of the New Moon, which is mentioned at the beginning of that passage.