续 拉瓦 对 拉夫纳赫曼:他难道要焚烧他的一群羊么?妥拉只叫他烧一只公山羊,照密释纳有时却要烧几只。拉夫纳赫曼 反驳:这可比么?那里论焚烧公山羊,经上没写「它」(那才限于一只);这里论放走的公山羊,经上写着「它」,可见只放走一只。驳难被驳倒,确只用一只放走的公山羊。
-
他难道要焚烧他的一群羊么?
And does he burn his flock?
-
妥拉只叫他焚烧一只公山羊,照密释纳所说,却有几次他须焚烧好几只。
The Torah obligated him to burn only one goat, and yet there are times when he must burn several, as stated in the mishna.
-
拉比纳赫曼 反驳说:这可以相比么?
Rabbi Naḥman retorts: Is it comparable?
-
那里论焚烧公山羊,经上没有写「它」——那一字才会把焚烧限于一只牲口;这里论放走的公山羊,经上却写着「它」,这就指明只放走一只牲口。
There, with respect to burning the goats, it is not written: “It,” which would restrict the burning to only one animal, whereas here, with regard to the scapegoat, it is written: “It,” which indicates that one animal alone is sent away.
-
这驳难已被驳倒,确实只用一只放走的公山羊。
The objection has been refuted and indeed only one scapegoat is used.