(Mishnah): And for [Aveiros] about which there was no Yedi'ah, not at the beginning and not at the end, the goats of the Mo'adim and Rosh Chodesh atone. R. Yehudah says so;

R. Shimon says, the goats of the Mo'adim atone for this, but not those of Rosh Chodesh;

For what do the goats of Rosh Chodesh atone? It is for a Tahor person who ate Tamei [Kodshim].

R. Meir says, all the goats atone for the same things, i.e. Tum'ah of the Mikdash or its Kodshim.

R. Shimon used to say, the goats of Rosh Chodesh atone for a Tahor person who ate Tamei Kodshim. The goats of the Mo'adim atone for [Tum'ah] that had no Yedi'ah at the beginning, and not at the end;

Those of Yom Kipur atone for [Tum'ah] there had no Yedi'ah at the beginning, but there is Yedi'ah at the end.

Question (Rabanan): May they be offered in place of each other? (If a goat designated for one of these three atonements was lost, and it was found after a substitute was offered, may the found goat be used for a different Kaparah?)

He told them, they may be offered. They asked him, since their Kaparos are not the same, how can they be offered?!

Answer (R. Shimon): They all atone for (transgressions involving) Tum'ah in the Mikdash or with Kodshim.

(Gemara - R. Lazar citing R. Hoshayah): R. Yehudah's reason is due to "u'Se'ir Izim Chatas la'Shem" - a sin that only Hash-m knows about it, this goat atones for it.

Question: This teaches only about the goat of Rosh Chodesh. What is the source for goats of the Mo'adim?

Answer (R. Zeira): [Regarding goats of the Mo'adim, it says] "u'Se'ir" - the prefix Vov adds (equates it) to what was written above (Se'ir Rosh Chodesh).

Question: Why [does R. Shimon say that Se'ir Rosh Chodesh atones for] a Tahor who ate Tamei? Perhaps it discusses a Tamei who ate Tahor!

Answer (R. Ze'ira and R. Lazar citing R. Hoshayah, and R. Yakov bar Acha citing R. Yochanan) Question: "V'Osah Nasan Lachem Laseis Es Avon ha'Edah" (Moshe rebuked Aharon for not eating one of the Se'irei Chatas offered on the day of Chanukas ha'Mishkan) - which [goat] is discussed?

Note: They come to explain R. Shimon's opinion. First they prove that the verse discusses Se'ir Rosh Chodesh.

If it is the goat (Chatas of) Nachshon (this cannot be, for) it atones [only] for his Shevet (and not for the entire Edah)!

If it is the goat of the eighth day [of the Milu'im], we do not have like it for all generations! (Aharon's answer "perhaps I was allowed to eat in Aninus only Kodshei Sha'ah, but not Kodshei Doros" shows that it applies to all Doros.)

Answer: We must say that it is Se'ir Rosh Chodesh.

Question: How does [R. Shimon derive from the verse that it discusses a Tahor who ate Tamei Kodshim]?

Answer: It says here "Nesi'as Avon", and also below [regarding the Tzitz] "v'Nasa Aharon Es Avon ha'Kodoshim." Just like there it is the sin of what is offered, and not the sin of those who offer, also here it is the sin of what is offered (Tum'as Basar), and not the sin of those who offer (Tum'as ha'Guf).

(R. Yosi bei R. Bun): (R. Shimon's reason is because one does not atone for what another atones for.) R. Yehudah argues with R. Meir's opinion (that all atone for the same thing. R. Yehudah holds that goats of Rosh Chodesh and the Mo'adim are the same, when there was no Yedi'ah at all, and the outer goat is when there was Yedi'ah at the beginning, but not at the end.) R. Shimon argues with R. Yehudah. (Goats of Rosh Chodesh do not atone for what those of the Mo'adim do, rather, for a Tahor who ate Tamei Kodshim.)

R. Yehudah agrees about the inner goat that it does not atone. It only suspends. (We explained this HAGAHOS R. DINAR.)

This is like R. Yonah in the name of R. Ze'ira "v'Asahu Chatas" - the verse fixed it to be suspended. (If it was chosen to be the inner goat, and the other died, so it was suspended (unable to be offered) until a lottery was done on two other goats, afterwards the first returns to its initial status. Likewise, the inner goat suspends, and when there is Yedi'ah at the end, he brings a Korban.

(Tosefta): R. Shimon [even though he holds that the goats atone for different matters, he] agrees that a goat that was not offered during the Mo'ed may be offered on Rosh Chodesh. If it was not offered on Rosh Chodesh, it is offered [for the outer goat] on Yom Kipur. If it was not offered on Yom Kipur, it is offered on the Mo'ed (Sukos). If it was not offered during this Mo'ed, it is offered on another Mo'ed;

This is because from the beginning, Korbanos Tzibur were Hukdash only to be offered on the outer Mizbe'ach.

Question: Was there not already a Kaparah? (How can it be offered to atone for Chata'im after Rosh Chodesh, the Mo'ed or Yom Kipur, which were after it was separated?)

Answer #1 (R. Mana): Since it says "[b']Chag ha'Matzos [u]v'Chag ha'Shavu'os [u]v'Chag ha'Sukos", it is as if they all give the same Kaparah (so one may be offered on the other. We explained this like KORBAN HA'EDAH.)

Answer #2 (R. Bun): Since all of them atone for Tum'as Mikdash v'Kodoshav, it is as if they all give the same Kaparah.

(R. Yakov bar Acha citing R. Yosa): The one who goes in front of the Teivah (the Shali'ach Tzibur) on the Yom Tov of Rosh Hashanah, he need not mention Rosh Chodesh (for mention of Rosh Hashanah counts for both of them).

Support (Rav Acha bar Papa - Beraisa): The one who goes in front of the Teivah (the Shali'ach Tzibur) on the Yom Tov of Rosh Hashanah [that falls on Shabbos] in Shacharis, Beis Shamai say, he says eight Brachos (the usual first three and last three, Kedushas ha'Yom and Shabbos). Beis Hillel say, he says seven (Shabbos is included in Kedushas ha'Yom). In Musaf, Beis Shamai say, he says 10 Brachos (like above, and Zichronos and Shofaros; Maclhuyos are together with Kedushas ha'Yom); Beis Hillel say, he says nine.

[If we would say that he must mention Rosh Chodesh, according to Beis Shamai] he should say 11!

Rejection (R. Yosi): [Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel] argue about something that requires a Brachah by itself. However, here even during the week he merely mentions [Rosh Chodesh] and includes it in Avodah!

Question (R. Yosi): If so, the two goats of Rosh Hashanah - [one of them is for Musaf Rosh Hashanah, and] one of them is for Musaf Rosh Chodesh. Can you say that he need not mention Rosh Chodesh?!

Answer (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): R. Yosi asked improperly! (Both goats are due to Rosh Hashanah.)

(Beraisa): The two goats (Chata'os) of Shavu'os (one in Musaf, and one brought with Shtei ha'Lechem), and the two goats of Rosh Hashanah - if the first atoned, for what does the second atone? It is for Tum'ah that occurred between one and the other;

Note: This is a Tosefta (Shevuos 1:2). R. Shimon taught this.

Is this not R. Shimon's opinion? R. Shimon distinguishes Kaparos! (What is difficult about Rosh Hashanah? The goat of Rosh Chodesh is for a Tahor who ate Tamei!) Rather, both [goats of Rosh Hashanah] are due to Rosh Hashanah.

Objection #1 (R. Avmarei): This cannot be, for it says "Milvad Olas ha'Chodesh"! (Ramban on the verse - this shows that Musaf Rosh Hashanah is in addition to Musaf Rosh Chodesh. Also Chatas Rosh Hashanah is in addition to Chatas Rosh Chodesh.)

Note: Perhaps R. Yosi bei R. Bun holds that just like Kedushah of the day adds Kedushah to all Korbanos of the day (Zevachim 91a), it causes Chatas Rosh Chodesh of Rosh Hashanah to atone like Chatas Rosh Hashanah. If so, also the next objection is not difficult.

Objection #2 (Beraisa): There are 12 [Se'irei Rosh Chodesh], for the 12 months of the year.

A Talmid of Abaye went in front of the Teivah [on Rosh Hashanah] and did not mention Rosh Chodesh, and they praised him.

Question (R. Hoshayah): Exert yourself [and you will find the answer! Above, we said that the two goats of Shavu'os, or the two of Rosh Hashanah, the latter atones for Tum'ah that occurred in between.] If both were slaughtered at once, how could Tum'ah occur in between?!

Answer (R. Bun): If Yisrael were Kesherim (had no sins of Tum'ah) do they not bring what the Torah fixed?! (Also here, we bring both even if one of them is not needed to atone.)

(R. Yochanan): Chachamim hold that we can change (Korbanos Tzibur that were not needed, and use the same animals for another year, for Lev Beis Din stipulates so. They are redeemed without a Mum.) R. Shimon holds that we cannot change. (They are redeemed only with a Mum.)

Question: If Chachamim hold that we can change, why did they ask (above, (h)) "may we offer [Korbanos of Mo'adim] in place of each other?" (Surely we may!)

Answer: They replied to R. Shimon according to his opinion. You say that we do not change. May we offer them in place of each other?

R. Yosi: [R. Shimon holds they can be offered at a different Mo'ed] because Korbanos Tzibur are fixed only according to the intent at the time of Shechitah.

Support (R. Yudan): A Mishnah teaches [that a Korban is slaughtered] l'Shem that Korban. The Korban l'Shem which it is offered, it is Kadosh [retroactively] from the beginning (We explained R. Yosi and R. Yudan like HAGAHOS R. DINAR.)