Study Yoma folio 65A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Everyone concedes that if the animal one designated as a sin-offering became lost, and he designated another animal in its stead and then found the first animal, if he gained atonement through the one that was not lost, i.e., the second one, the one that was lost is left to die.
However, according to the opinion of Rav, who rules that the remaining goat from the first pair is the one that is sacrificed, that goat was never disqualified, and the extra goat from the second pair was designated to serve the same purpose as the remaining goat. This is like one who designates tw
The Talmud answers: Since Rava said that Rav holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Yosei, who said that the mitzva should be performed with the first animal, when one designates the second animal, it is considered from the beginning to be comparable to an offering separated in order to be lost.
We learned in the Mishnah that R' Yehuda says: It should be left to die. Granted, according to the opinion of R' Yoḥanan, who said that the second goat of the first pair should be left to graze, according to R' Yehuda, who said it should be left to die, he nonetheless gains atonement with the secon
However, according to Rav, who said that the second goat of the second pair should be left to graze, and according to R' Yehuda it should be left to die, then according to R' Yehuda he cannot sacrifice either of the two goats: The first goat may not be sacrificed because R' Yehuda holds that disqu