Our Gemara on Amud Beis relates a dispute about the total number of blood sprinklings from the bull and goat during the Yom Kippur service—43, 47, or 48—in the various sections of the sanctuary and the altar. The difference depends on whether the High Priest mixes the blood of the bull and goat before placing it on the corners of the inner altar, or places each separately. The additional 48th sprinkling depends on whether the pouring of the blood on the base of the altar is considered an essential part of the service.
What is the significance of these numbers? The Maaseh Rokeach (Seder Moed, Yoma) explains:
The Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Offerings for Unintentional Transgressions 1:4) lists a total of 43 chattas offerings brought for unintentional sins that incur kares, consisting of a fixed sacrifice (meaning the same form applies to rich and poor alike). There are five additional chattas offerings that allow for a sliding scale—sometimes animal, sometimes bird, and sometimes even flour—such as those for defiling the Temple or sacrificial foods, a metzora, and others (Kerisos 10a).
Thus, 43 corresponds to the standard chattas offerings, 48 to the standard plus the five sliding-scale offerings, and 47 represents 48 minus one, when the two forms of impurity (defiling sacrificial food and the Temple) are considered one. Whether 43, 47, or 48, the Yom Kippur service symbolically provides atonement for all forms of kares.
We may still wonder why some require atonement for the sliding-scale chattas and others not. Perhaps since the Torah already provides flexibility based on means, it hints at even subtler, non-specified paths of atonement—personal ways not dependent on the formal Yom Kippur ritual.
The difference between 47 and 48 may depend on how one conceptualizes sin: are defilements merely variations of one trespass, or distinct categories? By way of metaphor, is trespassing on someone’s property versus sitting on their possessions in public without permission one kind of violation or two?
Though subtle, such distinctions have meaning. Proper atonement requires not only remorse but an awareness of what was transgressed. And perhaps here lies an insight: Hashem’s precision in delineating forms of atonement is itself a form of ahavah. To care enough to specify—to distinguish one infraction from another—is to remain engaged, attentive, and close. Distance that comes with discernment can be a form of endearment, a sign that the relationship still matters enough to refine and repair.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation
Free resource for couples/families:
Over 80 lectures on heathy communication, marriage and sexuality from a Torah perspective Click here
If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.
Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, LMFT, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com