Kommentar zu Shevuot 1:8

שבועות שתים – it is written in Scripture explicitly (Leviticus 5:4): “Or when a person utters an oath to bad or good purpose.” If he eats, it is for a good purpose; if he doesn’t eat, it is for a bad purpose, for he afflicts himself, and the same law applies for everything that is yes/positive or no/negative in the future, for to do bad or to do good in the future is implied.

Introduction Mishnah one is an introductory mishnah to the entire tractate. Besides mentioning oaths it mentions knowledge of impurity, a topic to be discussed throughout the remainder of the chapter.

שהן ארבע – one includes two others that are not written, and they are, yes/positive and no/negative that is of the past, such as “I ate or I did not eat, or I did not eat and I ate.

Oaths are of two kinds, subdivided into four; There are two kinds of oaths of “expression” (category one above, in introduction) which are explicit in the Torah: 1) A person swears to do something such as eating; 2) A person swears to refrain from doing something. If a person takes such an oath and then breaks it, he will be obligated to bring a sacrifice to atone for his sin (see Leviticus 5:4-13). The types of oaths specifically referred to in the Torah are oaths regarding the future, that a person will or will not do something. The Sages added two more types of oaths: those taken with regards to the past: 1) A person swears that he did do something; 2) A person swears that he did not do something. This is what the mishnah means when it says that there are two types of oaths which are four.

יעידות הטומאה – (Leviticus 5:2): “Or when a person touches an unclean thing” that is stated in Leviticus near the defiling of the Temple and its holy objects.

The laws concerning the discovery of having contracted uncleanness are of two kinds, subdivided into four; There are two types of sins mentioned in the Torah with regards to one who becomes impure without realizing it. The first is one who is impure and then eats holy food, such as sacrifices or terumah (heave offering). The second is one who is impure and then enters the Temple. One who had intentionally committed one of these acts would be obligated for kareth (excommunication). Our mishnah teaches that one who unintentionally does one of these acts, and later realizes what he has done, is obligated to bring a sacrifice. The Sages added two other types of sins of this nature. 1) A person knew that he was impure but did not know that what he was eating was holy food; 2) A person knew that he was impure but entered the Temple without realizing that he was doing so. In both of these cases the person is again obligated for a sacrifice.

שתים – are written in the Biblical verse, as it is written (Leviticus 5:2): “and the fact has escaped him, and then, being unclean, [he realizes his guilt],” implying that the defilement that escaped from him, and through that act of forgetfulness/having escaped from him, he ate holy meat, which is one [sin], or entered into the Sanctuary, which is two.

The laws concerning carrying on the Sabbath are of two kinds, subdivided into four. On the Sabbath it is forbidden to carry an object from the private domain to the public domain. The two primary categories of this prohibition are: 1) A person stands in the public domain and puts his hand into the private domain and brings something out; 2) A person stands in the private domain and puts something out into the public domain. The Sages taught that there are another two categories of forbidden carrying: 1) A person stands in the private domain and puts his hand out into the public domain and brings something in; 2) A person stands in the public domain and puts something from there into the private domain. These laws are discussed at greater length in Tractate Shabbath. They are only mentioned here due to the similarity in language with the first two sections.

שהן ארבע – one can include another two obligations. The escaping from him of holiness and the escaping of him of the Sanctuary and he remembered the defilement.

The symptoms of negas are of two kinds, subdivided into four. A nega is a skin disorder, discussed at length in Leviticus 13. It is often referred to as leprosy but in truth we do not know precisely what disease is referred to in the Torah. Our mishnah teaches that there are two types of negas mentioned specifically in the Torah: 1) A swelling; 2) A discoloration. The Sages added two more types of negas, both of which are learned from the word “rash” mentioned in the verse. These laws are discussed at greater length in Tractate Negaim.

יציאות שבת – removal from the private domain to the public domain, [whereby] we derive it from the Biblical verse (Exodus 36:6): “Moses thereupon had this proclamation made throughout the camp: [‘Let no man or woman make further effort towards gifts for the sanctuary!’]; you should not remove from the private domain to the public domain.

אחת – one – to the person who stands outside and stretches his hand inside and took the object and removed it, and the other for the person who stands inside and takes the object from his place and takes it outside.

שהן ארבע – one can add another two of bringing in, even though they are not written, for just as the Torah was strict from domain to domain regarding removing/taking out, so it was strict on bringing inside, one for the purpose standing inside and removing his hand to outside and taking the object and bringing [it] inside, and the other – for the person who stands outside and takes the object from his place and stretches [his hand] inside and places it [within].

מראות נגעים שתים – it is written in Scripture (Leviticus 13:2): “a swelling, [a rash], or a discoloration, [and it develops into a scaly affection on the skin of his body.”

שהן ארבע – the subspecies of a swelling and the subspecies of a discoloration, and they are not written explicitly in Scripture.

שיש בה ידיעה בתחלה – this refers to awareness of uncleanness, for since small/trifle things are explained in the opening clause [of the Mishnah] and it goes back and explains oaths which are large mattes, and the transporting [of objects on the Sabbath] and appearances [of plagues] , each and every one is explained in its own tractate, therefore, he (i.e., the Tanna) does not explain them in this Tractate, and they are not taught here other than because they are similar to each other in two sorets which yield four subdivisions.

Introduction Mishnah two begins to define when a person is obligated to bring a sacrifice in a situation where he did not know that he had been impure.

וידיעה בתחלה – that he knew that he became defiled.

Our mishnah begins to discuss the laws concerning the discovery of the contracting of uncleanness mentioned in section two of the previous mishnah.

וידיעה בסוף – from when he ate the Holy thing in an act of forgetfulness/that it escaped him, or entered into the Sanctuary in act of forgetfulness/that it escaped him and he left, and it became known to him that in defilement he ate or that in defilement he entered [into the Sanctuary].

Where there is knowledge at the beginning and at the end but forgetfulness between, a “sliding scales” sacrifice is brought. In order for one to become obligated to bring a sacrifice for this type of sin, one must have known that he had become impure, and then forgot, and then ate of a holy thing or entered the Temple, and then afterwards remembered that he was impure. In other words there must be knowledge of the impurity in the beginning of the process and knowledge at the end, as well as forgetfulness in between at the time when he either at holy food or entered the Temple.

ןהעלם בינתיים– when he ate the Holy food, the defilement or the sanctity [of the place] in act of forgetfulness/that it escaped him or he entered into the Sanctuary and in an act of forgetfulness/that it escaped him, the defilement or the Sanctuary.

Where there is knowledge at the beginning but not at the end, the goat which is [sacrificed and its blood sprinkled] within [the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement] together with the Day of Atonement itself hold the sin in suspense until it become known to the sinner, and he brings the “sliding scale” sacrifice. If after having eaten the holy food or entered the Temple one never afterwards rembembered that one was impure at the time, obviously one will not even realize the need to bring a sacrifice to atone for the sin. Therefore our mishnah teaches that the sin is suspended, meaning punishment for the sin is suspended, through the sacrifice of the goat on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) and through Yom Kippur itself. Once he does remember what he has done, although Yom Kippur and the sacrificial goat have meanwhile suspended the punishment for the sin, he must bring a sacrifice in order to achieve full atonement.

הרי זה בעולה ויורד – a burnt offering for a wealthy individual and something of lesser value for a poor person. The wealthy person brings a sin-offering of cattle, and a poor person the sin offering of fowl, and the poorest of he poor, one tenth of an Ephah, which is a meal offering of sinner that is mentioned in every place.

שעיר הנעשה בפנים – the goat of Yom Kippur that he brings from its blood inside.

תולה – to protect him from suffering/trials.

עד שיודע לו – that he ate Holy things in a state of ritual impurity, and he brings the Sacrifice of Higher or -11; Tractate Shevuot 21a).

אין בה ידיעה בתחלה – he did not know about this ritual defilement at all, this does not into the category of [a required] sacrifice ever, for the sacrifice dos not come other than when he has awareness [of ritual impurity] at the beginning.

Introduction Mishnah three continues to define when a person is obligated to bring a sacrifice in a situation where he did not know that he had been impure.

שעיר הנעשה בחוץ – that is offered on the outer altar [which yields blood to be sprinkled] during the Musaf of Yom Kippur.

Where there is no knowledge at the beginning but there is knowledge at the end, the goat sacrificed on the outer altar together with the day of atonement bring atonement, for it says: “[one he-goat for a sin-offering] beside the sin-offering of atonement” (Numbers 29:1: for that which this goat [prepared inside the Holy of Holies] atones this goat [prepared outside] atones: just as the ‘inner’ goat atones only for a sin where there was knowledge [at the beginning], so the “outer” goat atones only for a sin where there was knowledge [at the end]. Our mishnah deals with the situation where a person did not know that they had become impure and then ate of holy food or entered the Temple and then realized that they were impure. Since there is not knowledge in the beginning and in the end, this person cannot achieve atonement by personally bringing a “sliding scale” sacrifice. Rather our mishnah teaches that the goat sacrificed on Yom Kippur at the outer altar as a sin-offering brings atonement from this person. This teaching is learned by a comparison with the goat offered inside the Holy of Holies. Just as the goat offered inside brings atonement in a case where there was knowledge of the contraction of uncleanness, in this case prior to the eating of the holy food or the entering into the Temple (see mishnah two) so too the goat offered outside brings atonement in a case where there was knowledge of the contraction of uncleanness, in this case after the eating of the holy food or the entering into the Temple.

ויום הכיפורים – itself atones with the goat.

שנאמר – regarding the goat that is offered on the outer altar (Numbers 29:11): “And there shall be one goat for a sin offering, in addition to the sin offering of expiation,” for the sin offering of expiation is the goat that is offered inside and Scripture juxtaposed them, to teach you just as one expiates/atones, so too the other atones/expiates; the inside [goat] doesn’t come other than with a matter about which there is awareness, and what is this awareness? At the outset, as we derive from Scripture, as it is written (Leviticus 16:21): “[Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat and confess over all the iniquities and transgressions of the Israelites,] whatever their sins, [putting them on the head of the goat],” which implies that for those that come within the category of sin - , that they should have awareness of them at the conclusion, and it is impossible that to come within the category of sin-offering other than if they had awareness at the outset, even the goat that is offered outside does not atone other than if he as awareness of it, and what is it? Awareness at the conclusion and not at the beginning, for they are not included in the category of sacrifice, and this atoning is complete atonement/expiation without doubt.

שעירי הרגלים – On all the Festivals, it was stated, “the oats as a sin offering”” (see, for example, Numbers 28:22 for Passover).

Introduction Our mishnah discusses which goat offerings atone for which sins. There are three goat offerings discussed in this mishnah, all of which are sin-offerings (hatat): 1) Those offered on festivals; 2) Those offered on the first of the new month; 3) The goat offered on the outer altar on Yom Kippur. The Sages all agree in general that these sin-offerings atone for one who imparts impurity either to holy food or to the Temple. However, they disagree as to which goat atones for which specific sin.

ושעירי ראשי חדשים מכפרים – as it is written with regard to the goat on the New Moon/Rosh Hodesh (Numbers 28:15): “And there shall be one goat as a sin offering,” a sin that one doesn’t recognize other than God [Himself], this goat will atone, and that means that he has no awareness neither at the beginning nor at the end. And the goats of the Festivals, we learn from the goat for the New Moon through a juxtaposition, for “goat” could have been written in all the Festivals, and it (i.e., the Torah) wrote, “and a goat”, and the VAV adds on the first matter, to make the juxtaposition that just as this one expiates/atones, so all of the others atone.

Where there is no knowledge [of the impurity] either at the beginning or at the end, the goats offered as sin-offerings on festivals and new months bring atonement, the words of Rabbi Judah. According to Rabbi Judah, the goats offered on the holidays and on the new months atone for sins of impure people who entered the Temple or ate holy food, in cases where their impurity never became known to them. In the previous two mishnayoth we learned the procedures of atonement in cases where their impurity did become known to them, either in the beginning in the end.

כל השעירים כפרתן שוה – all the goats of the Musaf [sacrificial] service, whether they are the goats of the festival or the goat of the New Moon, whether the goat that is offered outside on Yom Kippur, their expiation/atonement is equivalent, for they atone whether there was no awareness at the at the beginning but there is awareness at the end, or whether there is no awareness either neither at the beginning nor at the end, whether about someone pure who ate something ritually impure, and we derive from it, for a defilement that occurred whether for one or the other. But a goat that is prepared for sacrifice inside on Yom Kippur, they did not disagree about, for it is assigned to the case where he has awareness at the beginning but does not have awareness of it at the end, as we have stated.

Rabbi Shimon says: “The festival goats atone [for such sins] and not the new moon goats. And for what do the new month goats bring atonement? For a pure man who ate impure holy food.” According to Rabbi Shimon, the goats offered on the festival atone for sins of pure people eating holy food or entering the Temple. The goats offered on the new month atone for sins whereby a pure person unintentionally ate impure holy food.

היה רבי שמעון אומר – this is for one who retracted, that it [i.e., the Mishnah] took it, because it was necessary to state that they said to him: what is the Halakha if they are offered together?

Rabbi Meir says: “All the goats have equal powers of atonement for imparting impurity to the Temple and holy food. According to Rabbi Meir all three of the goats mentioned here atone for all three of the crimes mentioned in this mishnah and in the previous one: 1) An impure person who entered the Temple or ate holy food and only realized that he had been impure after the fact; 2) An impure person who entered the Temple or ate holy food and never realized that he had been impure; 3) A pure person who unintentionally ate impure holy food.

מהו שיקרבו – if he lost a goat that was set aside for Yom Kippur, and they were expiated with another [goat] and this one (i.e., the original goat) was found on the Festival (i.e. Sukkot) or on Rosh Hodesh, what is the law regarding that it be offered for the purpose of the goat [of the sin offering] of that day?

Rabbi Shimon used to say: “The new month goats bring atonement for a pure man who ate impure holy food; and the festival goats atone for transgression of the laws of impurity where there was no knowledge either at the beginning or at the end; and the ‘outer’ goat of the Day of Atonement atones for transgression of these laws where there was no knowledge at the beginning but there was knowledge at the end. This section reviews Rabbi Shimon’s opinion with regards to the three goats and the three sins. According to his opinion each goat atones for its own sin. 1) The goat offered on new months atones for a pure person who unintentionally ate impure holy food. 2) The goat offered on festivals atones for an impure person who entered the Temple or ate holy food and never realized that he had been impure. 3) The goat offered on the outer altar on Yom Kippur atones for an impure person who entered the Temple or ate holy food and only realized that he had been impure after the fact.

אמרו לו הואיל ואין כפרתן שוה – It is Rabbi Meir who says to Rabbi Shimon, it is all well if you said that all of them their expiation is equivalent, then let it be offered, for all of them are atone for one expiation, but according to you, this one that was set aside/separated to expiate for a case where he had no awareness at first, and there is awareness of it at the conclusion, how can he sacrifice [it] on the Festival to expiate where he had no awareness [of having sinned through uncleanness] either at the beginning or at the conclusion, or on Rosh Hodesh to atne for a pure person who ate something impure/unclean?

They said to him: “Is it permitted to offer up the goat set apart for one day on another?” He said to them: “Let it be offered.” They said to him: “Since they are not equal in the atonement they bring how can they take each other's place?” He replied: “They are all at least equal [in the wider sense] in that they bring atonement for transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food.” The Rabbis ask Rabbi Shimon what happens in a situation where one of the goats set aside to be offered on one of these occasions is lost and then found on a different occasion. Since all three of the goats are all sin-offerings can the goat set aside for one occasion be offered on another? Rabbi Shimon answers that it can. The other Rabbis then raise a difficulty on Rabbi Shimon’s response. Since according to Rabbi Shimon each goat atones for its own sin, it would seem that each goat is different from the other goats. Therefore, how could a goat intended for example for a new month be offered on a festival? Rabbi Shimon responds that they all have a common denominator in that they atone for sins of imparting impurity to the Temple and to holy food. Since they are all means of atonement for similar types of sins, each can replace the other.

לכפר על טומאת מקדש וקדשיו – because in this, they are equivalent, even though their expiations are divided, he can offer it up.

Questions for Further Thought:
• Section five: Why is this question asked of Rabbi Shimon and not of Rabbi Meir or Rabbi Judah? What might these other Sages have responded to this question?

משמו – of Rabbi Shimon. And the anonymous Rabbi Shimon (without his patronymic) is Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai.

Introduction Mishnah five is a continuation of the discussion in the previous mishnah. There we learned three different opinions with regards to the topic of which sin-offering goats bring atonement for which sin. The final opinion was that of Rabbi Shimon, whose full name is Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai. According to his opinion each goat atones for its own sin. 1) The goat offered on new months atones for a pure person who unintentionally ate impure holy food. 2) The goat offered on festivals atones for an impure person who entered the Temple or ate holy food and never realized that he had been impure. 3) The goat offered on the outer altar on Yom Kippur atones for an impure person who entered the Temple or ate holy food and only realized that he had been impure after the fact. Our mishnah contains a different version of Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai’s opinion, taught by Rabbi Shimon ben Judah, one of his students. It seems that the students of Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai, who lived in the middle of the second century C.E., disputed what their teacher’s opinion really was. The previous mishnah contained one student’s opinion and our mishnah contains another’s.

Rabbi Shimon ben Judah said in his name [of Rabbi Shimon (bar]: “The new month goats bring atonement for a pure person who ate impure holy food; the festival goats, in addition to bringing atonement for a pure person who ate impure holy food, atone also for a case where there was no knowledge either at the beginning or at the end; the ‘outer’ goat of the Day of Atonement, in addition to bringing atonement for a pure person who ate impure holy food and for a case where there was no knowledge either at the beginning or at the end, atones also for a case where there was no knowledge at the beginning but there was knowledge at the end. According to Rabbi Shimon ben Judah the goats offered on the festival atone for a pure person who ate impure holy food, the goats offered on the new months atone for this sin as well as a case where an impure person entered the Temple or ate holy food and never realized that he had been impure, and the goat offered on the outer altar on Yom Kippur atones for both of these previous sins as well as a case where an impure person entered the Temple or ate holy food and only realized that he had been impure after the fact. In other words festival goats atone for one sin, new month goats for two sins and Yom Kippur goats for all three of the sins under discussion.

They said to him: “Is it permitted to offer up the goat set apart for one day on another?” He said, “Yes.” They [further] said to him: “Granted that the Day of Atonement goat may be offered up on the new month, but how can the new month goat be offered up on the Day of Atonement to bring atonement for a sin that is not within its scope?” He replied: “They are all at least equal [in the wider sense] in that they bring atonement for transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food.” Similar to the previous mishnah, our mishnah now continues with a discussion of a case where one of the goats set aside to be offered on one of these occasions is lost and then found on a different occasion. The question is asked: since they are all sin-offerings, can one be offered in another’s place? Rabbi Shimon ben Judah answers that they can, just as his teacher Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai answered in the previous mishnah. The Rabbis then raise a difficulty with this answer. It is possible to understand how a Yom Kippur goat could be offered on the new month, since all of the sins for which the new month goat atones, the Yom Kippur goat also atones. However, how can a new month goat be offered on Yom Kippur since the new month goat does not atone for all of the sins for which a Yom Kippur goat atones? Rabbi Shimon ben Judah’s answer is the same answer as that of his teacher. All of the goats have a common denominator in that they atone for sins of imparting impurity to the Temple and to holy food. Since they are all means of atonement for similar types of sins, each can replace the other.

Questions for Further Thought:
• What is the difference between the end of this mishnah and the end of the previous mishnah?

ועל זדון טומאת מקדש וכו' – the anonymous section of the Talmud took this.

Introduction Mishnah six continues to discuss which sacrificial goat brought as a sin-offering brings atonement for which transgression.

שעיר הנעשה בפנים ויום הכפורים מכפרים – as it is written (Leviticus 16:21): “and transgressions of the Israelites, whatever their sins, [putting them on the head of the goat.” But the transgressions are the rebellious acts (as opposed to sins of passion).

For intentional transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food, the goat offered inside [the Holy of Holies] on the Day of Atonement together with the Day of Atonement itself bring atonement. The previous several mishnayoth discussed for which sins the goats offered on new months, festivals and at the outer altar in the Temple on Yom Kippur bring atonement. Our mishnah discusses yet a fourth goat, the goat sacrificed by the High Priest on Yom Kippur and whose blood is sprinkled inside the Holy of Holies. This goat along with Yom Kippur itself atones for intentional transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food. The previous mishnayoth discussed only unintentional sins.

החמורות והקלות וכו' – Our entire Mishnah is explained in the Gemara in the following manner (Tractate Shevuot 12b): whether minor or serious whether the act were perpetrated willfully or inadvertently, those that were done inadvertently, whether he was aware of the doubt concerning them or not aware of the doubt, meaning to say, whether he was aware that there came to his hand something that was doubtfully forbidden fat and he ate it, whether he did not know that something was doubtfully forbidden fat. And which are the minor [transgressions], whether they are positive or negative commandments, and which are the stringent cases, for extirpation or death at the hands of the Jewish court [The goat that is sent away provides atonement].

For other transgressions of the Torah, light and grave, intentional and unintentional, known and unknown, positive and negative, those punishable by kareth and those punishable by death imposed by the court for all these the scapegoat [sent out on the Day of Atonement] brings atonement. All of the other possible transgressions of the Torah’s laws, no matter how they are punished and no matter how serious they may be, whether done intentionally or unintentionally, are atoned for by the scapegoat, sent out to the wilderness, on Yom Kippur. This teaching is learned from Leviticus 16:21-22: “And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat and confess over it all the iniquities and transgressions of the Israelites, whatever their sins, putting them on the head of the goat; and it shall be sent off to the wilderness through a designated man. Thus the goat shall carry on it all their iniquities to an inaccessible region.” Our mishnah does not mention this, but there is one exception to this rule: transgressions between one human being and another, for instance shaming another person in public. The last mishnah in Tractate Yoma, which deals with Yom Kippur, states explicitly: “For sins between a man and God Yom Kippur atones; for sins between a man and his fellow, Yom Kippur does not atone.”

אחד ישראל ואחד כהנים – this is what he said: [It effects atonement all the same] whether one is an Israelite or whether one is a Kohen or whether one is an anointed priest, the goat that is sent away atones in the rest of the sins and there is no distinction between them.

Introduction Mishnah seven discusses differences between the atonement of Israelites and the atonement of priests.

אלא שדם הפר מכפר על הכהנים על טומאת מקדש וקדשיו – all that the inner goat expiates for the Jewish people (i.e., non-Kohanim), meaning/it is identical with the suspense/doubt of the Israelites depend upon an awareness [of sin] at the beginning but there isn’t awareness at the end, and willful defilement of the Sanctuary and its Holy Things, and similarly the atonement of the outer goat, the bullock of the High Priest that is sacrificed on Yom Kippur which atones for the Kohanim.

[The scapegoat] brings atonement to Israelites, priests, and the anointed high priest alike. What [then] is the difference between Israelites, priests, and the anointed high priest? [None], save that the bullock [offered on the Day of Atonement] brings atonement to the priests for transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food. The scapegoat mentioned in the previous mishnah atones for the transgression of all of the members of Israel, including the priests. The one difference between priests and regular Israelites is that priests are atoned for transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food by the sacrificial bullock, brought on Yom Kippur. This is learned from Leviticus 16:11, “Aaron shall then offer his bull of sin offering, to make expiation for himself and his household.” “His household” refers to all of the priesthood. However, except for this difference, there is not difference in the atonement process for priests and Israelites.

Rabbi Shimon says: “Just as the blood of the goat that is offered within [the Holy of Holies] brings atonement for Israelites, so the blood of the bullock [offered on the Day of Atonement] brings atonement for priests; and just as the confession of sins pronounced over the scapegoat brings atonement for Israelites, so the confession pronounced over the bullock brings atonement for priests. Rabbi Shimon disagrees with the opinion in the previous mishnah. H learns this by means of an analogy. Israelites receive atonement for transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food by the sprinkling of the blood of the inner goat, without the confessional recited on the scapegoat. So too do priests receive atonement for transgressions of the laws of impurity in connection with the temple and holy food by the means of the blood of the sacrificial bullock without the confessional mentioned Leviticus 16:11. Therefore, we must ask, for what sin does the confessional bring atonement? According to Rabbi Shimon the confessional over the bullock acts for priests the same way that the confessional over the scapegoat acts for Israelites. Just as the confessional over the scapegoat brings atonement for all sins for Israelites, so too the confessional over the bullock brings atonement for all sins for priests. This is the disagreement between Rabbi Shimon and the opinion in section one: according to Rabbi Shimon priests receive atonement for most of their sins by the confession over the bullock, while according to the other Sages they receive atonement the same way other Israelites do, by the confession over the scapegoat.

רבי שמעון אומר כשם – that you admit regarding the blood of the inner goat that atones for the Israelites, an expiation without confession, for there is no confession regarding the inner goat, other than the goat which is sent away, so too, the blood of the bullock without any confession atones for the Kohanim on their defilement of the Sanctuary and its Holy Things, one adds for him his confessions of the bullock in place of the confession of the goat that is sent away to expiate for the Kohanim with the rest of the sins, for they have no atonement with the goat that is sent away.