Yoma 62a (סב.) — the Talmud in English

And according to your reasoning,

does its entire flock burn?!

That is, the same reasoning was also stated with regard to burning: only one should be burned. Yet 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 the cases comparable?!

There,

with regard to burning,

“it” is not written.

But

here,

with regard to the scapegoat sent to Azazel,

it is written:

to send

“it” to Azazel, to the wilderness, teaching you: one, but not two.

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

It was stated:

Rav Pappi said in the name of Rava:

The

first goat

upon which the designation was cast,

is the one sent

to Azazel.

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

And we challenge this:

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

one can understand his reasoning, because

he holds: Since atonement was completed through it

with its counterpart, and therefore this goat is the one that is sent [unclear: editorial abbreviation].

But Rav Pappi, who said in the name of Rava,

who said that the first is the one sent, although he holds that the reasoning “since atonement was completed through it” applies only to its counterpart that was designated for the Lord, and not to this one, nevertheless,

what does he hold,

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

And we explain:

He follows the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who says: There is a mitzva to use the first.

As we learned in the Mishna: There were three collection boxes

in the Temple,

each containing three se'ah, from which the chamber was collected.

The Jewish people would place their half-shekels [the half-shekel for communal offerings] in a special chamber, and from there the shekels would be transferred into three collection boxes,

and the letters alef, bet, and gimel were written on them.

And it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yosei said: Why were the letters alef, bet, and gimel written on them?

In order

to know from which of them the collection was taken first, so that from it should be brought

[to take funds for communal offerings from the first box]

first

[at the outset],

because there is a mitzva to use the first.

And we reject this: There is no basis for comparing our case to the collection boxes, for one can say:

Perhaps

there it is different, because

at the time

when the first became fit for use, the latter had not yet become fit for use,

since when the first became fit for bringing offerings from it, the second had not yet become fit for that purpose, as its collection had not yet been taken. Therefore, they take from the one that became fit for that purpose first—

But in our case, where all three goats became fit at the same time to be sent to Azazel, when all the blood applications had been completed, you cannot infer that there is a mitzva to send only the one upon which the designation was cast first.

Rather, it is the opinion of Rabbi Yosei concerning the Paschal offering—

As it was taught in a beraita: One who sets aside his Paschal offering and it is lost, and he sets aside another in its place, and afterward the first is found, so that both of them are standing: Whichever of them he wishes, he may sacrifice; this is the statement of the Sages.

Rabbi Yosei says: There is a mitzva to use the first; but if the second is superior to it,

then

he should bring it

as the second.

We have completed the fifth chapter, “They brought him”

Mishna:

The two goats of Yom Kippur [

one for the Lord and one for Azazel ]

It is a mitzva that both of them be alike in appearance,

in their color [that both be black, or white, or brown]],

and

alike

in height,

and in price,

that the two goats be purchased for an equal price,

and in their purchase,

that their purchase be

together,

at the same time.

And although

the two goats

are not alike

in appearance, height, and price, they are

valid

after the fact, because this matter is not indispensable; rather, it is a mitzva לכתחילה.

And likewise, if

he purchased one today and one tomorrow,

they are

valid,

even though their purchase was not together, because this too is only a mitzva לכתחילה.

And if

one of them died,

of the two goats, then:

If it died before he cast the lots [

before the lottery ],

he shall take

another

pair for the other,

for the living goat. [As we learned above, that if he purchased one today and one tomorrow, they are valid].

But if, after he cast the lots, [

after the lottery ]

one of them died,

one of them,

he shall bring another pair —

two additional goats —

and cast lots over them afresh,

with a new lottery: 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

designated for the Lord died —

the priest shall say as follows:

This

goat

over which

now

the lot for the Lord fell —

shall serve in its place

of the first goat designated for the Lord, which died.

It follows that he now has one goat for the Lord and two goats for Azazel: one is the goat remaining from the first lottery, and the other is its pair. The Mishna will explain below what is to be done with the surplus goat.

B.

And if

the goat

for Azazel died —

he shall say as follows:

This one over which the lot fell

now

for Azazel shall serve in place of

the first goat for Azazel, which died.

It follows that he now has two goats for the Lord and one goat for Azazel.

The Mishna explains what is to be done with the surplus goat in each of these two cases:

And the second,

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

It shall graze until it becomes unfit,

until a blemish occurs in it,

and it shall be sold,

and through this sale it becomes non-sacred, while its proceeds remain consecrated,

and its proceeds shall go toward

a burnt-offering of

voluntary offering

of the community.

Although the law is that a sin-offering whose owners achieved atonement through another [for example, a sin-offering that was lost, whose owners offered another in its place, and then the first was found] is unfit to be offered, and it is placed in a chamber, which is locked until it dies.

If so, when there are before us two sin-offering goats for the Lord, how can the second [surplus] goat graze until it becomes unfit, and a voluntary burnt-offering be brought with its proceeds? Its law should be like that of every sin-offering whose owners achieved atonement through another, which is left to die!

Your answer:

A communal sin-offering is not left to die,

but only an individual’s sin-offering [whose owners achieved atonement through another]; it was only with regard to an individual’s sin-offering that the halakha given to Moses at Sinai stated that it is left to die.

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

Rabbi Yehuda says:

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

is left to die.

Therefore, here too, the surplus goat is left to die.

And Rabbi Yehuda further said:

if, after they slaughtered the sin-offering goat for the Lord,

the blood was spilled,

before the High Priest completed all the sprinklings prescribed for it [and they had not fulfilled 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]; he shall offer one for the Lord and send one to Azazel, and the first goat for Azazel will remain in his possession as a surplus.

And since according to Rabbi Yehuda a communal sin-offering whose owners achieved atonement through another is left to die, here too

the first goat sent away shall be left to die,

the surplus first goat, since atonement has already been achieved through the goat sent away from the second pair.

And if

the goat

the

goat sent away

dies after the sin-offering goat for the Lord has been slaughtered, he must bring two other goats and cast lots over them. From the second pair, he shall offer one for the Lord and send one to Azazel.

It follows that the first sin-offering goat is surplus, and therefore

its blood shall be poured out

of it.