Yoma 67b (סז:) — the Talmud in English

The one who says they are permitted

for benefit, his reason is because

it is written [Leviticus 16:22]: “And he shall send away the goat

into the wilderness

.”

And this verse is superfluous, and it comes to teach us that the goat is to be ownerless like the wilderness, [that one may do with it whatever one wishes].

And the one who says they are forbidden

for benefit, his reason is because

it is written [there]: “And the goat shall bear upon itself all their iniquities to a

land of

decree”;

and gezeira denotes stringency and prohibition, teaching us that its limbs are forbidden for benefit.

And we challenge this:

And the one who says

that the limbs

are forbidden

for benefit encounters a difficulty according to his view:

This “And he shall send away the goat into the

wilderness

—what does he do with it?”

What exposition does he derive from this superfluous verse?

And we answer:

He needs it

—he needs the verse in order to derive another teaching from it,

as it was taught

in a beraita:

The sending of the goat into the wilderness is mentioned three times in the Torah: A. “And the goat upon which the lot fell for Azazel shall be left alive … to send it away to Azazel

in the wilderness” [verse 10]. B. “And he shall send it by the hand of an appointed man

into the wilderness” [verse 21]. C. “And he shall send away the goat

into the wilderness” [verse 10]. b. “And he shall send it by the hand of a designated man

into the wilderness” [verse 21]. c. “And he shall send the goat

into the wilderness” [verse 22].

into the wilderness” [verse 22].

Lest you say that the law of the scapegoat applies only in the Tent of Meeting [mentioned in the passage], the verse comes

to include

that it also applies in

Nov and Gibeon,

in

Shiloh and in the everlasting House

[the Temple in Jerusalem].

And we challenge this:

But the other one—the one who says that the limbs of the goat are permitted for benefit—encounters a difficulty according to his view:

the one who says that the goat’s limbs are permitted to derive benefit from—has a difficulty according to his view:

This “decree”

mentioned in the verse [“to a land of decree”]

what does he do with it?

What exposition does he derive from this verse?

And we answer:

He needs it

—he needs the verse in order to derive another teaching from it,

as it was taught

in a beraita:

“Decree,”

which is stated in the verse—what does it mean?

It is not “a

land of

decree,” but rather

a land

cut off;

from here it is derived that the goat must be sent to a cliff that is cut off and steep, not one with a gradual slope.

Alternatively: “Decree” means something that is cut up as it descends

—a land upon which the goat is cut into limb after limb when it falls.

Alternatively:

Why was the word

“decree” stated?

Lest you say that sending away the goat is

a meaningless act

[an empty act]

;

for what atonement is there through this goat, and what benefit can the cliff provide?

The Torah therefore states

—for this reason it states

“I am the Lord,”

meaning:

I, the Lord, have decreed it, and you have no permission to question it .

The verse “I am the Lord” is not stated in the passage concerning the goat that is sent away, but concerning all the mitzvot [Leviticus 18], and it is cited below in another beraita [see there]. Rav Elikim wrote: The Torah therefore says “decree,” which implies, “I have decreed it.” [It is possible that this was his reading of the Gemara, unlike the reading before us].

Rava said: It is reasonable according to the one who says

that the limbs of the goat

are permitted

for benefit, because

the Torah did not

possibly

say: Send it to cause a stumbling block

—that one should send the goat in a manner that could lead to a mishap, whereby a person might find the limbs of the goat and benefit from them without knowing that they came from the goat.

The place to which the goat is sent is described in the Torah by several designations: A. Azazel. B. Wilderness. C. Land of decree.

The following beraita explains why the mountain is described by all these designations:

The Sages taught:

The word

“Azazel”

mentioned in the verse is expounded as two words: “ez,” “el.” From here it is derived

that

the mountain to which the goat is sent

shall be strong and harsh. “El” denotes strength and harshness.

The word “powerful” indicates something hard.

And I might have

thought

that it should be sent to a strong and harsh mountain that is

inhabited.

The Torah therefore states

—for this reason it says

“into the wilderness.”

And from where is it derived that

the reference is to

a cliff

that is steep?

The Torah therefore states: “A

land of

decree”—a land that is cut off. [A mountain cut off in a vertical form].

isolation”—a land that is cut off. [A mountain cut into a vertical shape].

Another teaching was taught

in a different beraita:

“Azazel”

means

the harshest of the mountains, and so

the verse

says [Ezekiel 17:13]:

[Ezekiel 17:13]

“And he took the mighty ones

[the strong ones]

of the land.”

[The tanna expounded the word “el” in “Azazel” in the sense of the mighty ones mentioned in the verse].

The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught

a beraita that expounds “Azazel” in a different manner:

The mountain is called

“Azazel,”

to tell you

that

its function

atones for

those who commit

the deed

of the destructive angels

Uzza and Azael,

who sinned through forbidden sexual relations [that is, it atones for the sin of forbidden sexual relations ].

Earlier we learned in a beraita that one must not question the sending of the goat and say that it is a meaningless act. Here the Gemara cites another beraita of a similar nature:

The Sages taught:

It is stated [Leviticus 18:4]: “You shall perform My ordinances and observe My statutes, to walk in them; I am the Lord your God.” The beraita proceeds to interpret the verse:

“You shall perform My ordinances”

—these are

matters that

even

if

[they had not]

been written, it would be self-evident

that we should understand on our own

that they should be written.

And these are them: idolatry, forbidden sexual relations, bloodshed, robbery, and blasphemy

[expressed euphemistically].

“You shall observe My statutes”

—these are

matters to which the Satan

—the evil inclination—

responds,

challenging them in order to mislead Israel into thinking that the Torah is not true, saying: What benefit is there in these matters?

And these are them:

the prohibition against

eating pork. And

the prohibition against

wearing shaatnez. And

the mitzva of

halitza of a yevama. And

the law of

purification

of the

metzora. And

the mitzva of

the scapegoat.

For none of these can we determine a reason through our own understanding.

And lest you say: They are meaningless acts

[empty acts]?

The Torah therefore states

—for this reason it says at the end of the verse

“I am the Lord.”

To tell you:

I, the Lord, decreed them

[I ordained them],

and you have no permission to question them.

We learned in the Mishna:

When

does the one who sends the goat

render the garments

he is wearing impure? Once he has left beyond the wall of Jerusalem. Rabbi Shimon says: From the moment he pushes it off the cliff.

The Sages taught:

The one who sends

the goat to Azazel

renders the garments

he is wearing impure.

But the one who sends—

the escort —

the one who accompanies the sender

from Jerusalem

does not render his garments impure.

And I might have

thought

that

once he has left beyond the wall of

the

Temple courtyard

he already renders his garments impure.

The Torah therefore states

—for this reason it says [Leviticus 16:26]:

“The one who sends,”

which indicates that he has already begun sending the goat [and the sending begins only from the walls of Jerusalem onward, when they begin accompanying him ].

Perhaps

it might be said: Since

“the one who sends” is stated, one might

say that he does not render his garments impure

until he reaches the cliff,

when he has completed his mission?

The Torah therefore states: “And the one who sends”

with the additional letter vav, to include that even if he has not completed the sending, he renders the garments he is wearing impure.

And since, on the one hand, the verse [“the one who sends”] indicates that he does not render them impure until the time of the sending, while on the other hand, the additional letter vav indicates that this applies even if he has not completed his mission,

what is the resolution?

When does he render garments impure?

Once he has left beyond the wall of Jerusalem; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Yose says:

It is stated: “And the one who sends the goat to Azazel shall wash his garments.” From the juxtaposition of the words

“Azazel and shall wash”

it is understood that he does not render garments impure

until he reaches the cliff

of Azazel.

Rabbi Shimon says:

It is stated:

“And the one who sends the goat to Azazel shall wash his garments.”

The sending of the goat, according to Rabbi Shimon, means that he pushes it and

throws it headlong, and

only from that moment

does he render garments impure.

Before that, even once he has reached the cliff, he does not render them impure.

Mishna:

In the previous Mishna we discussed the one who sends the goat to Azazel—how the sending was conducted and what its laws were. Now the Mishna returns to the order of the High Priest’s service, after he gave the goat to the one who was to lead it:

He came

—the High Priest—

to

the

bull and

the

goat that are burned

[whose law is that they be burned],

cut them open and removed their fats

designated to be offered on the altar.

He placed them in a magis

—a bowl among the sacred vessels—

and offered them on the altar,

as it is stated [Leviticus 16:25]: “And the fat of the sin-offering he shall offer on the altar.” [The Gemara will explain that he had not yet offered them, but had prepared them for offering].

After he removed the fats from the bull and the goat,

he tied them in a braided arrangement.

Four men carried them, holding two poles and walking with one pole beside the other: two men in front and two behind. They placed the bull and the goat on the poles while they were still whole [apart from their fats, which had been removed from them as stated above], and folded one over the other in a form resembling a braid.

And he brought them out

by means of other men

to the place of burning.

This was a place outside Jerusalem designated for burning sacred offerings, and they burned them there.

The garments of those engaged in the burning become impure, as it is stated [Leviticus 16:28]: “And the one who burns them shall wash his garments.” This indicates that his garments became impure and therefore he must wash them [that is, immerse them in a ritual bath].

And from when

do those engaged in the burning

render garments impure?

Once they have left beyond the wall of the Temple courtyard.

Rabbi Shimon says: Once the fire has taken hold

[once the fire has caught]

of most of them.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: [After he gave the goat to the one who was to send it, he came to the bull and the goat that are burned,] cut them open, removed their fats, placed them in a magis, and offered them on the altar.

And we are astonished:

“And offered them”—can this enter your mind?!

Was the High Priest now offering the fats?! Surely the offering of the fats took place on the outer altar, while wearing golden garments. But at this point the High Priest was still wearing white garments, until after he read the passage of the day [as explained below at the beginning of the following chapter]!

And we answer:

Rather, say

that this is what the Mishna said: “He placed them in a magis [in order] to offer them [later]

on the altar,”

and in fact he did not offer them at that time. Rather, after the fifth immersion, when he put on the golden garments, he offered the additional offerings, the fats of the bull and the goat, and the daily offering between the evenings.

We learned in the Mishna:

He tied them in a braided arrangement.

And we explain:

Rabbi Yohanan said: In the form of a braid.

A tanna taught

in a beraita:

The one who burned

the bull and the goat

did not cut them

into sections

as

was done in

the cutting of the flesh of a burnt-offering

before it was offered, for concerning a burnt-offering it is stated [Leviticus 1:6]: “And he shall flay the burnt-offering and cut it into its pieces, and the priest shall offer it all on the altar.” From here it is derived that the burnt-offering was cut into pieces before it was offered, and the cutting was done after the flaying [as is explicitly explained in the verse].

Rather

before burning the bull and the goat, the one who burned them cut them into pieces while

the hide was still on the flesh.

And we inquire about this:

From where are these matters

derived—that they cut the flesh of the bull and the goat, and that the cutting was done while the hide was still on the flesh?

And we answer:

As it was taught: Rabbi says: It is stated here

concerning the bull and the goat: “hide,” “flesh,” and “entrails,” as it is stated [Leviticus 16:27]: “And they shall burn in fire their hides, their flesh, and their entrails.”

And it is stated elsewhere

concerning the sin-offering bull of the anointed priest: “hide,” “flesh,” and “entrails.”

As it is stated [Leviticus 4:11–12]: “And the hide of the bull, and all its flesh, with its head and with its legs, and its entrails and its dung. And he shall bring out the entire bull. And he shall burn it.”