Yoma 62a — the Talmud in English

And according to your reasoning,

does his herd burn?!

That is to say: behold, from that same reasoning it was also said regarding burning that only one should be burned, but this is not what they said in the beraita, rather: “And all of them are burned at the place of the ashes”?!

And we explain:

Are they comparable?!

There,

regarding burning,

“that one” was not written.

But

here,

regarding the goat for Azazel,

it is written:

to send

“that one” to Azazel, to the wilderness, to teach you: one and not two.

to Azazel, into the wilderness, teaching you: one and not two.

It was stated:

Rav Pappi in the name of Rava said:

The

first goat

upon which he cast the lot, that

is sent to Azazel.

to Azazel is sent.

And Rav Shimi in the name of Rava said: The last is sent.

And we raise a difficulty:

Granted, Rav Shimi in the name of Rava, who said: The last is sent,

one can understand his reason, because

he holds: since atonement was completed through it

with its partner, and therefore this goat is the one that is sent away [R"L].

But Rav Pappi in the name of Rava,

who said: The first is sent, even though he holds that the reasoning “since atonement was completed through it” applies only to its partner that went up to the Lord and not to it; nevertheless,

what does he hold,

for what reason does he send the first [according to Tosafot Yeshanim]?!

And we explain:

He holds like Rabbi Yosei, who says: The mitzva is with the first.

For we learned: There were three baskets

in the Temple,

each of three seah, with which they contributed the chamber.

The Israelites would place their shekels [the half-shekel for communal offerings] in a special chamber, and from it they would transfer the shekels to three baskets,

and A, B, G was written on them.

And it was taught: Rabbi Yosei said: Why was A-B-G written on them?

In order

to know which of them was contributed first, to bring from it

[to take for communal offerings from the first basket]

first

[at the beginning],

for the mitzva is with the first.

And we reject this: Our matter cannot be compared to the baskets, for one can say:

Perhaps

it is different there, for

at the time that the first became fit, the latter had not become fit

yet,

when the first became fit for bringing offerings from it, the second had still not become fit for this, since it had not yet been contributed; and therefore they take from the one that became fit for this first—

but in our matter, where all three goats became fit at the same time to be sent to Azazel when all the presentations had been completed, you cannot learn that the mitzva is to send only the one upon which the lot was cast first.

Rather, Rabbi Yosei regarding the Pesach offering—

For it was taught: One who designates his Pesach offering and it was lost, and designated another in its place, and afterward the first was found, and behold both of them are standing: whichever of them he wishes, he may offer; these are the words of the Sages.

Rabbi Yosei says: The mitzva is with the first, but if the second is superior to it,

then

he shall bring it

as the second.

We have completed for you the chapter “They brought it out for him”

Mishna:

The two goats of Yom Kippur

one for the Lord and one for Azazel

their mitzva is that both of them should be equal in appearance,

in their color [that both of them should be black, or white, or brown

and

equal

in height,

and in price,

that two goats should be purchased for an equal price,

and in their purchase,

that their purchase should be

at one time,

at the same hour.

And although

the two goats

are not equal

in appearance, height, and price, nevertheless they are

valid

after the fact, because this matter does not invalidate, but is only a mitzva from the outset.

And likewise, if he

took one today and one tomorrow,

they are

valid,

even though their purchase was not at one time, because this is only a mitzva from the outset.

And if

one of them died,

of the two goats, then:

If it died before he cast the lots

before the casting of the lots

he shall take

another

as a pair for the other,

for the living goat. [As we learned above: If he took one today and one tomorrow, they are valid

].

And if it died after he cast the lots after the casting of the lots

one

of them

he shall bring another pair—

two additional goats—

and cast lots over them at the outset,

a new lot. One for the Lord and one for Azazel.

And he shall say

the priest, as the Mishna explains, according to which goat died:

a.

If

it happened that the goat

for the Name died—

the priest shall say as follows:

This

goat

upon which

now

the lot for the Name fell—

shall take the place of it

of the first goat for the Name that died.

And it turns out that he now has one goat for the Lord and two goats for Azazel. One is the goat remaining from the first casting of the lots, and the second is its pair. Below, the Mishna will explain what he should do with the surplus goat.

b.

And if

the goat

for Azazel died—

he shall say as follows:

This upon which the lot fell

now

for Azazel shall take the place of it

of the first goat for Azazel that died.

And it turns out that he now has two goats for the Lord and one goat for Azazel.

The Mishna explains what he should do with the surplus goat in each of the two cases:

And the second,

the surplus goat [if the goat for the Lord died, there are two goats for Azazel, and only one of them is sent away. And likewise, if the goat for Azazel died, there are two goats for the Lord here. And only one of them is offered for the Lord

]. It shall graze until it becomes blemished,

a blemish will occur in it,

and it shall be sold,

and through this sale it leaves the realm of non-sacred property, while its money remains consecrated,

and its money shall fall to

a burnt-offering of

freewill offering

of the community.

And although the law is that a sin-offering whose owners achieved atonement through another [for example, a sin-offering which was lost, and the owners offered another in its place, and the first was found] is unfit for offering, and they bring it into a chamber and lock it there until it dies.

And if so, when two sin-offering goats for the Lord are before us, how can the second goat [the surplus one] graze until it becomes blemished, and he bring a freewill offering with its money? Surely its law should be like the law of every sin-offering whose owners achieved atonement through another, which dies

! Your answer is:

A communal sin-offering does not die,

but only an individual sin-offering [whose owners achieved atonement through another]; only concerning an individual sin-offering was it stated as a halakha transmitted to Moses at Sinai that it dies.

But the sin-offering goat of Yom Kippur is a communal sin-offering.

Rabbi Judah says:

Even a communal sin-offering whose owners achieved atonement through another

dies.

Therefore here too the surplus goat shall die.

And Rabbi Judah further said: If it happened, after they slaughtered the sin-offering goat for the Lord, that

If it happened, after they slaughtered the sin-offering goat for the Lord, that

the blood was spilled,

before the High Priest finished performing all the sprinklings stated concerning it [and they did not fulfill their obligation]—he must bring two other goats and cast lots over them [so that he can bring another goat as a sin-offering and sprinkle its blood], and he shall offer one for the Lord and send one to Azazel, while the first goat for Azazel remains in his possession as a surplus.

And since according to Rabbi Judah a communal sin-offering whose owners achieved atonement through another dies, therefore here too

the sent-away goat shall die

the first surplus one, for atonement has already been achieved through the sent-away goat in the second pair.

And if

the

goat

sent away

dies after the slaughter of the sin-offering goat for the Name, he must bring two other goats and cast lots over them. And from the second pair he shall offer one for the Lord and one for Azazel.

And it turns out that the first sin-offering goat is surplus, and therefore

its blood shall be spilled

of it. Page 62b