Keritot 26A

למפשטה לא מדרב דימי ולא מדאביי,

and find a way to explain that halakha, neither from that statement of Rav Dimi, who derived it from the verse: “And from their transgressions, for all their sins” (Leviticus 16:16), nor from that statement of Abaye, who derived it from the verse: “For all their transgressions, for all their sins” (Leviticus 16:21).

אלא מהא: חטא שאין מכיר בו אלא המקום ⁠– יום הכפורים מכפר, ומינה: חטא שאין מכיר בו אלא המקום הוא דיום הכפורים מכפר, אבל דידע בה ⁠– לא מכפר.

Rather, it is derived from that which R' Elazar said: With regard to Yom Kippur the verse states: “From all your sins before YHWH” (Leviticus 16:30). This indicates that Yom Kippur atones for a sin of which only God is aware, i.e., an uncertain sin for which one brings a provisional guilt offering. And from that statement it is derived that it is only for a sin of which only God is aware that Yom Kippur atones, but it does not atone for a sin about which the sinner is aware.

ואמר רב תחליפא אבוה דרב הונא משמיה דרבא: חייבי מלקיות שעבר עליהן יום הכפורים ⁠– חייב. פשיטא! מאי שנא מחייבי חטאות ואשמות ודאין?

And Rav Taḥlifa, father of Rav Huna, further says in the name of Rava: Those liable to receive lashes for whom Yom Kippur has passed are liable to receive those lashes after Yom Kippur. The Talmud asks: Isn’t that obvious? What is the difference between this case and the case of those liable to bring sin offerings and definite guilt offerings, who must bring them after Yom Kippur?

סלקא דעתך אמינא: התם ⁠– ממונא הוא, אבל הכא דגופא הוא ⁠– אימא לא, קא משמע לן.

The Talmud answers: It might enter your mind to say: There, where the liability to bring sin offerings and definite guilt offerings is financial in nature, Yom Kippur does not exempt one from financial obligations. But here, where the liability to incur lashes applies to one’s body, one might say that he is not flogged after Yom Kippur. Therefore, Rav Taḥlifa teaches us that this is not so.