Talmud su Levitico 16:78

MISHNAH: The High Priest comes to read. If he wants to read in the byssus garments¹The white garment which he wore for the ceremonies in the Temple building. he may read; otherwise in his own while stole²Greek στολή, ἡ.. The beadle of the synagogue³The synagogue on the Temple Mount, outside the Temple precinct. The president of the Synagogue had to carry the scroll into the Temple courtyard. This clearly is a Pharisaic institution. takes the Torah scroll and hands it to the president of the synagogue, the president of the synagogue hands it to the executive officer of the Temple, the executive officer of the Temple hands it to the High Priest. The High Priest receives it standing, and reads standing. He reads after the death⁴Lev. 16:1–34. and but on the tenth day⁵Lev.23:26–32., rolls up the Torah, keeps it in his bosom, and says: More than what I read before you is written here. On the tenth day in Numbers⁶Num. 19:7–11. he recites⁷קורא always means to recite with the correct masoretic accents. by heart, and pronounces eight benedictions⁸These will be detailed in the Halakhah.: For the Torah, for the Service, for thanksgiving, for the remission of sin, for the Temple, for Israel, for the priests, and general prayer.
He who sees the High Priest reading does not see the burning of the bull and the ram; he who sees the burning of the bull and the ram does not see the High Priest reading. Not because he would not be entitled to it but because the distance was large and the actions happened simultaneously.

MISHNAH: Seven days before the Day of Atonement one isolates the High Priest from his house¹Meaning his wife, as explained later in the Mishnah. To prevent him from becoming impure should the wife become impure by menstruation. to the Parhedrin²In the Halakhah the name also appears as פלהדרין with change of liquids. Possibly derived from πάρεδρος, ὁ, “adjunct”; cf. Note 113. lodge and one prepares another Cohen because he might become disqualified³Since the entire Temple service of the Day of Atonement has to be performed by the High Priest himself, there must be somebody trained to act as High Priest in case the officiating one becomes somehow impure and unable to continue.. Rebbi Jehudah says, one also prepares for him another wife, since maybe his wife would die, for it is said, he shall atone for himself and his house⁴Lev. 16:6., his house means his wife. The Sages said to him, in this case the procedure never ends⁵Since the substitute wife also could die, one would need an unlimited supply of wives, but the High Priest is biblically restricted to one wife. Disqualification can be foreseen, death cannot be foreseen..

MISHNAH: He scrambled the urn¹To make sure that he had no control about which lot he grabbed in each hand. and brought up the two lots; one had written on it “for Hashem²Cf. Chapter 3, Mishnah 9, Notre 144.”, and the other had written on it “for Azazel³Since הָאֶ֥בֶן הָאָֽזֶל (IS. 20:19) is a monolith, עז-אזח is a strong monolith, either a rocky mountain top or a sheer cliff, in the words of the verse (Lev. 16:22) “in a cut (or cut-off) land.””, with the executive officer to his right and the head of the serving family to his left. If the Eternal’s came up in his right hand, the executive officer said to him, “Sir High Priest, lift you right hand.” But if it came up in his left hand, the head of the serving family said to him. “Sir High Priest, lift your left hand.” He puts them on the two he-goats⁴Standing between the two he-goats, the lot in his right hand is put on the he-goat to his right, and the one in his left on the he-goat to his left side. and says, “for Hashem a purification offering”⁵In Lev. 16:9 the expression וְעָשָׂה֭וּ חַטָּֽאת׃ cannot mean “sacrificed it as purification offering” since its slaughter is prescribed only in v. 15; it must mean “declare it as purification sacrifice.”. Rebbi Ismael says, it was not necessary to say “a purification offering,” only “for Hashem”⁶Since both he-goats already were taken as purification sacrifices, v. 5., and they answer, “praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever.”

HALAKHAH: “The High Priest comes,” etc. From where the reading of the Chapter⁹But there is no claim that reading of any text other than Lev. 16 is a biblical commandment.? Rebbi Idi in the name of Rebbi Isaac¹⁰The two Medieval quotes of this passage, Tosaphot Yeshenim and Ritba, read R. Joḥanan. This was the scribe’s original text corrected by himself to: R. Isaac.: And he executed, what does the verse say? As the Eternal had commanded Moses¹¹Lev. 16:34., from here the reading of the Chapter¹²Since the commandment to Moses was verbal, so the execution had to be verbal. The Babli 5b has a similar argument concerning the initiation rites of the Cohanim..

HALAKHAH: “An oath about testimony,” etc. ⁷This text essentially is Sanhedrin 3:10, Notes 150–165, with a related text in Yoma 6:1. The many parallels in Babli (30a,b, Yoma 62b), Tosephta, and halakhic Midrashim are indicated in Sanhedrin.Rams⁸Lev. 16:5,7,8. Any indeterminate plural means 2, the minimum of many., the minimum of rams are two. Why does the verse say two? That they be equal.

HALAKHAH: “The two he-goats of the Day of Atonement,” etc. ⁸The following is a slightly changed verson of a text appearing in Sanhedrin 3:10 (Notes 150–162) and Ševuot 4:1 (Notes 7–17).He-goats⁹Lev. 16:5,7,8. Babli 62b, Sifra Aḥare Parasḥah 2(1)., the minimum of he-goats are two. If so, why does it say two? That they be equal.

HALAKHAH: “An oath about testimony,” etc. ⁷This text essentially is Sanhedrin 3:10, Notes 150–165, with a related text in Yoma 6:1. The many parallels in Babli (30a,b, Yoma 62b), Tosephta, and halakhic Midrashim are indicated in Sanhedrin.Rams⁸Lev. 16:5,7,8. Any indeterminate plural means 2, the minimum of many., the minimum of rams are two. Why does the verse say two? That they be equal.

HALAKHAH: “The two he-goats of the Day of Atonement,” etc. ⁸The following is a slightly changed verson of a text appearing in Sanhedrin 3:10 (Notes 150–162) and Ševuot 4:1 (Notes 7–17).He-goats⁹Lev. 16:5,7,8. Babli 62b, Sifra Aḥare Parasḥah 2(1)., the minimum of he-goats are two. If so, why does it say two? That they be equal.

HALAKHAH: “An oath about testimony,” etc. ⁷This text essentially is Sanhedrin 3:10, Notes 150–165, with a related text in Yoma 6:1. The many parallels in Babli (30a,b, Yoma 62b), Tosephta, and halakhic Midrashim are indicated in Sanhedrin.Rams⁸Lev. 16:5,7,8. Any indeterminate plural means 2, the minimum of many., the minimum of rams are two. Why does the verse say two? That they be equal.

HALAKHAH: “He scrambled the urn,” etc. Not only an urn but even baskets. And why did they say, an urn? To give solemnity to the act. Could one not bring two threads, one white and one black, tie them to them⁷Tie the threads to the horn of the he-goats. and say, this is for Hashem and this is for Azazel? The verse says⁸Lev. 16:8., one lot for the Eternal, that it shall be recognizable that it was for the Eternal, and one lot for Azazel, that it shall be recognizable that it was for Azazel. Could he not bring two pebbles, [put on them]⁹Addition (probably unnecessary) by the corrector. and say, this is for Hashem and this is for Azazel? The verse says, one lot for the Eternal, [so it shall be recognizable that it was for the Eternal, and one lot for Azazel, that it shall be recognizable that it was for Azazel. Could one not write on them]⁹Addition (probably unnecessary) by the corrector. saying this is for Hashem and this is for Azazel? The verse says, one lot for the Eternal, that it itself be proof that it was for the Eternal, and one lot for Azazel, that it itself be proof that it was for Azazel. This implies that they¹⁰The lots, boxwood or gold, were used every year and were permanently engraved. were engraved.

HALAKHAH: “The two he-goats of the Day of Atonement,” etc. ⁸The following is a slightly changed verson of a text appearing in Sanhedrin 3:10 (Notes 150–162) and Ševuot 4:1 (Notes 7–17).He-goats⁹Lev. 16:5,7,8. Babli 62b, Sifra Aḥare Parasḥah 2(1)., the minimum of he-goats are two. If so, why does it say two? That they be equal.

²¹This paragraph is also in Megillah 4:5 (75b l. 52), ל. Quoted in Tosaphot Yeshenim70a. There²²Mishnah Megillah 4:5., we have stated: “One skips in prophets; one does not skip in the Torah.²³Public readings of the Torah must present a continuous text. Readings from the Prophets may be pieced together, such as in the Ashkenazic Haftara to Yitro, Is. 6:1–7:6, 9:5–6.” “One skips in prophets,” but one does not skip from one prophet to another, except that one is permitted to skip between the Twelve Prophets²⁴The 12 minor prophets are considered one book. The Ashkenazic Haftara for the Sabbath between New Year’s day and Yom Kippur is composed of Hos. 14:2–10 and either Joel 2:15–27 or Micah7:18–20.. “One does not skip in the Torah.” Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Because one does not scroll the book of the Torah in public. Rebbi Yose asked, think of it, if it was a small paragraph²⁵If one continues on the same page after an interruption, nothing has to be scrolled.? But so that Israel should hear the Torah in due order. But did we not state: “he reads after the death⁴Lev. 16:1–34. and but on the tenth day”⁵Lev.23:26–32.? There is a difference since this is the order of the day. You should know this, as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one never recites from memory but here he recites²⁶The sacrifices detailed in Num.19:7–11 (offered by the High Priest in his year-round “golden” garments) are completely different from those required by Lev. 16, for whose service white linen garments are prescribed. Therefore mention of the text in Num. 19 is essential, but scrolling such a large distance would be an interruption of the public service.. Rebbi Yose ordered Bar Ulla, the beadle of the synagogue of the Babylonians: If there is one Torah²⁷On a day which requires reading two different sections, such as a New Moon celebrated on a Sabbath, or a holiday. Then the Torah has to be scrolled, but this should not be done in public., scroll it behind a curtain. If there are two, take away one and bring the other²⁸This is current Sephardic practice, in contrast to current Ashkenazic procedure where the second Torah is brought before the first is lifted..

¹⁴This refers to the priestly garments mentioned in the Mishnah. A parallel is in Babli Yoma 71b. Rebbi Zeïra said: It is written (Lev. 16:4) “He shall wear a garment of holy bad,” growing singly¹⁵Since בד can mean (1) single strand, connected with Hebrew בדד, Arabic بدّ “to separate”, or (2) linen cloth. It is not explicit in the text that the garments of the High priest for the service of the Day of Atonement have to be of white linen. The meaning (2) of בד is established in this paragraph. In Sifra Aḥare 1(3) בד is taken to mean “double cloth”.. But wool also grows in single strands¹⁶Nothing here proves that בד means linen cloth, not woolen cloth; this shows that the modern acceptation of בד “cloth (of any kind)” was current in the times of the Yerushalmi.. It is explained in tradition (Ez. 44:17): “There should be no wool on them when they officiate inside the inner doors¹⁷In order to make the point clear, the verse is slightly misquoted, “inner doors” instead of “the gates of the inner courtyard”. Since the courtyard reserved for the priests had no gates, the sentence is taken as referring to the ṭriqsin cubit (Chapter 8, Note 93)..” Therefore, on the outside wool may be on them. From where that they may wear kilaim? As it says (Ex. 39:28): “The cap of byssus, the hat-turbans of byssus, the cloth trousers of spun byssus, and the belt of spun byssus, blue, purple, and crimson¹⁸One has to prove that “blue, purple, and crimson” mentioned in the description of the priestly garments and the gobelins of the Tabernacle always refers to blue, purple, and crimson wool..” And it is written (Ez. 44:18): “Linen turbans shall be on their heads, linen trousers shall be on their hips, they shall not belt with sweat.” You infer “byssus” from “byssus”, “byssus” from “turbans”, “turbans” from “turbans”.¹⁹This proves that שש means “linen cloth”. שש is defined by its use as material for the priests’ turbans, which are described as made of linen by Ezechiel. [The Babli (Note 14) interprets שש to mean “spun six-fold”; this is not known to the Yerushalmi.] Just as crimson is made from a living being, so the rest is made from a living being²⁰Since the red color of crimson is made from insects [Sifra Meẓora‘ (14)], so the material of the series in which crimson appears should be of animal origin. {In Hebrew, the terms חײם and דוח חײם only apply to animals, never to plants.} Therefore, it should be some kind of wool. The next sentence then refers back to the discussion that only sheep’s wool and linen do not need a qualifier in their descriptions.. Just as wool cannot have an epithet so linen cannot have an epithet.

Since Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish has this objection, from where does Rebbi Simeon derive it³³The rule that the High Priest is separated from his family for seven days before the Day of Atonement.? Following that of Rebbi Ismael:³⁴Babli 4a. With this Aaron shall come into the Sanctuary³⁵Lev. 16:3., what was said in the matter³⁶Of Aaron’s induction into the High Priesthood.. One separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Also in this case one separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Is that spelled out in the matter? But since the death of Aaron’s sons is mentioned in the matter³⁷Lev. 16:1. and they died during the initiation, it is as if the matter was mentioned. Does not in the end Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish understand it from the same verse³⁸He still has to explain the same verse used by R. Joḥanan and Bar Qappara, which he himself proved to be inadequate.? But he is like a person who hears a statement and questions it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is: the glory of the Eternal was dwelling on Mount Sinai³⁹Ex. 24:16.. Just as Moses did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was sanctified in the cloud all of seven days, so Aaron did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was inducted by the anointing oil all of seven days⁴⁰It is not a biblical requirement but popular usage supported by an aggadic argument..

Since Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish has this objection, from where does Rebbi Simeon derive it³³The rule that the High Priest is separated from his family for seven days before the Day of Atonement.? Following that of Rebbi Ismael:³⁴Babli 4a. With this Aaron shall come into the Sanctuary³⁵Lev. 16:3., what was said in the matter³⁶Of Aaron’s induction into the High Priesthood.. One separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Also in this case one separates him all of seven days, he serves all of seven days, and one initiates him all of seven days. Is that spelled out in the matter? But since the death of Aaron’s sons is mentioned in the matter³⁷Lev. 16:1. and they died during the initiation, it is as if the matter was mentioned. Does not in the end Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish understand it from the same verse³⁸He still has to explain the same verse used by R. Joḥanan and Bar Qappara, which he himself proved to be inadequate.? But he is like a person who hears a statement and questions it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is: the glory of the Eternal was dwelling on Mount Sinai³⁹Ex. 24:16.. Just as Moses did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was sanctified in the cloud all of seven days, so Aaron did not enter the Holiest of Holies before he was inducted by the anointing oil all of seven days⁴⁰It is not a biblical requirement but popular usage supported by an aggadic argument..

In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, why is the death of Aaron’s sons mentioned in the matter when they died during initiation? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, Aaron’s sons died on the First of Nisan; why does He mention their death at the Day of Atonement⁴¹Lev. 16:1.? To teach you that just as the Day of Atonement atones for Israel, so the death of the Just atones for Israel. Rebbi Ba bar Binah said, why did the verse append the death of Miriam to the Chapter of the Cow⁴²The rules of the Red Cow and purification from the impurity of the dead are given in Num. 19; the death of Miriam is noted in v. 20:1.? To teach you that just as the ashes of the Cow atone for Israel, so the death of the Just atones for Israel. Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said, why did the verse append the death of Aaron to the breaking of the Tablets⁴³The breaking of the Tablets and the story of the Golden Calf are quoted in Deut.9:7–29; Aaron’s death is mentioned in 10:6 in a verse which requires further explanation, given in the next paragraph without reference to the Day of Atonement. Lev. rabba 20, end.? To teach you that the death of the Just is as hard for the Holy One, praise to Him, as the breaking of the Tablets.

Aaron shall put⁸Lev. 16:8., if a non-Cohen puts it is qualified³¹If a non-Cohen puts the lots on the he-goats, they remain qualified. This can happen only following Rebbi, who extends the space where the ceremony can be held in the courtyard of Israel. For everybody else the statement means that if the lots are not put on the he-goats the ceremony still is valid.. Similarly, if a non-Cohen draws it is disqualified³²The drawing of lots from the urn by a non-Cohen is invalid and disqualifies the he-goats from being used in any sacrificial way.. An argument de minore ad majus. If putting, where Aaron’s sons³³Aaron’s sons are not mentioned in the entire Chapter, only Aaron himself. are mentioned, is qualified if a non-Cohen puts it, drawing, where Aaron’s sons³¹If a non-Cohen puts the lots on the he-goats, they remain qualified. This can happen only following Rebbi, who extends the space where the ceremony can be held in the courtyard of Israel. For everybody else the statement means that if the lots are not put on the he-goats the ceremony still is valid. are not mentioned, not so much more³⁴Lev. 16:8 mentions that Aaron has to put the lots on the he-goats; that the lots have to be drawn first is an inference, not a separate statement. If the drawing is not written in the verse, Aaron cannot be mentioned in connection with it.? No, it is not necessarily so. Putting on, which is obstructive³⁵From the preceding it follows that in the text the places of “obstructive” and “not obstructive” must be switched. “Obstructive” means that the ceremony (and all which follows) become invalid by its omission., if a non-Cohen puts it is qualified. Drawing, which is not³⁵From the preceding it follows that in the text the places of “obstructive” and “not obstructive” must be switched. “Obstructive” means that the ceremony (and all which follows) become invalid by its omission. obstructive, if a non-Cohen draws it is disqualified. And Rebbi Isaac ben Haqula said in the name of Rebbi Yannai, drawing from the urn is obstructive, putting on is not obstructive³⁶Babli 39b.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he establishes even by word of mouth³⁷For him the drawing of lots is not indispensable; Babli 39b.. They thought to say, even one today and one tomorrow³⁸Since the entire service is restricted to one day, this can only mean that for R. Joḥanan it is possible to predetermine the he-goat which is to be the purification sacrifice.. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan who said, even one today and one tomorrow, it is understandable. In the opinion of Rebbi Yannai, why does it say, lots³⁹These sentences have to be switched. For R. Yannai, for whom drawing of lots is indispensable, the lots have to be mentioned. But for R. Joḥanan , for whom the fate of the he-goats can be predetermined, why are lots mentioned at all?? As meritorious deed. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan : The lot makes it a purification sacrifice, giving it the name does not make it a purification sacrifice. He explains it, if the drawing succeeds⁴⁰The position of R. Joḥanan is modified. He will agree that using an urn in the service is required. In the case that the High Priest loses the lots which he is lifting, the ceremony does not have to be repeated, the he-goats do not become disqualified, and he can proceed to select the he-goat to be sacrificed following the rules spelled out earlier.. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Yannai: If he did not draw lots and did not confess it is qualified, only he missed a meritorious deed⁴¹Since the objection cannot be answered, practice has to follow R. Joḥanan . Babli 40a..

²³The same text in Yoma 8:8 (45b l.70, ו),Ševuot 1:9 (33b l.60, ש); similar texts in the Babli Yoma 86a, Tosephta Yom Hakippurim 5:6, Mekhilta dR. Ismael Yitro7, Avot dR. Nathan A 29, Midrash Mishle 10(6) [Yalqut Šim`ony Jeremiah 269, Wehizhir part 1 p. 54]. Rebbi Matthew ben Ḥarash asked Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah in the Academy²⁴In Babylonian sources he either asked R. Eleazar ben Azariah in Rome or R. Eleazar the Caper grower in Laodicea.. He told him, did you hear the four types of Atonement which Rebbi Ismael explained? He answered him, there are three in addition to repentance. One verse says²⁵Jer. 3:22., return, naughty children, I shall heal your waywardness. But another verse says²⁶Lev. 16:30., for on that day, He shall pardon you, to cleanse you. And another verse says²⁷Ps. 89:33., I shall visit their crime with the rod, and their iniquity with plagues. And another verse says²⁸Is. 22:14., the iniquity of this people shall not be atoned for until you die. How is this? If somebody violates a positive commandment and repents, immediately before he moves from there the Holy One, praise to Him, would forgive him. About this one it says, return, naughty children, I shall heal your waywardness. If one transgresses a prohibition, repentance suspends judgment, and the Day of Atonement pardons. About this one it says, for on that day, He shall pardon you, etc. If one intentionally transgressed [sins punishable by] extirpations or death penalties, repentance and the Day of Atonement pardon half, and sufferings pardon half. About this one it says, I shall visit their crime with the rod, etc. But by whom the Name of Heaven was desecrated, there is no power in repentance to suspend judgment, nor in the Day of Atonement to pardon, nor in sufferings to scour; but repentance and the Day of Atonement pardon a third, and suffering a third, and death scours²⁹The root מרק is used in Lev. 6:21 to describe the thorough cleansing of a metal vessel by scouring.
In the Ševuot text, punishment for behavior that amounts to Desecration of the Name, i. e., unethical behavior by reputedly religious persons, can be suspended by repentance and the Day of Atonement, but only death in suffering scours. a third. About this one it says, the iniquity of this people shall not be atoned for until you die. From this we learn that death scours.

So is the Mishnah: “One brings two and he draws new lots for them. He shall say, ‘the one for which the lot for Hashem is drawn shall be taken in its stead.’²⁴As it was translated in Mishnah 2, the clause אִם שֶׁל שֵׁם מֵת “if the one for Hashem dies,” describes the background of the required action; it is not part of the declaration by the High Priest.” Which of them is sacrificed first²⁵This now refers to the case that the he-goat to be sent to the Azazel dies and one is left with two he-goats as prospective sacrifices.? Rav said, the second in the second pair; Rebbi Joḥanan said, the second in the first pair²⁶Rav holds that since the sacrifice of the first he-goat becomes invalidated if the he-goat for Azazel died, since it was stated that if the he-goat for the Azazel died after the first he-goat had been slaughtered, the blood has to be poured out and the entire ceremony started anew with a new pair of he-goats, a sacrifice which became invalidated never can be reinstated. While it is a general principle that a sacrifice which became invalidated never can be reinstated, R. Joḥanan holds that the living he-goat is not disqualified if its companion he-goat died, but it only is suspended. If a second he-goat is newly chosen, the suspension of the first is removed.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, the reason of Rebbi Joḥanan: he shall make it a purification sacrifice²⁷Lev. 16:19., of the first {pair.²⁸Since the verse refers to the first pair, the first he-goat is irrevocably made a sacrifice.} Rebbi La said, the reason of Rebbi Joḥanan: he shall make it a purification sacrifice, he established it for dependency lest it be pushed aside²⁹A different formulation of the same idea.. This is parallel to what Rebbi Jonah said in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira, he shall make it a purification sacrifice, he established it for dependency that its companion be paired with it. In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, if the second in the second pair died, would the second in the first pair be pushed aside? There came Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: then the second in the first pair already is pushed aside³⁰If the replacement he-goat for the Azazel also died, R. Joḥanan might agree that a double suspension is equivalent to invalidation.. [So much more would Rav’s reasoning be inverted? If the second in the second pair died, the second in the second pair already is pushed aside.³¹Addition of the corrector. The question here is different. One brings a second pair and draws lots. According to the Mishnah, the new he-goat for the Azazel is selected. If then the first he-goat dies, following Rav’s original position the second drawing of lots was made under erroneous hypotheses, and a third pair of he-goats would be needed.
The corrector’s source is unknown.]

The priest shall atone who was anointed¹⁴⁴Lev. 16:32. The problem is the legitimacy of a priest appointed ad hoc as High Priest to conduct the service of the Day of Atonement for which common priests are disqualified. Sifra Aḥara Mot Pereq 8((4–5).. Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where to include another priest? The verse says, who was anointed; with the anointing oil. From where the one clothed in multiple garb¹⁴⁵The High Priest in Second Temple times who was not anointed since the anointing oil prepared by Moses was lost.? The verse says, who was inducted into office. And from where another who was appointed¹⁴⁶In an emergency of the Day of Atonement where no formal session of a court can be held. Even when anointing oil was available, simple investiture was enough.? The verse says, the priest shall atone¹⁴⁷Since it does not stress “the High Priest”, it follows that any priest can be appointed to fill the office.. How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth¹⁴⁸It does not need the laying on of hands nor a document of appointment. (Tosaphot 12b s, v. כהן).. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court for Israel.¹⁴⁹Mishnah Idiut 5:6. The oral promise was irrevocable.
Here end the parallels in Horaiot and Megillah.”

MISHNAH: In any case⁵⁶This refers to violations of the laws of purity (Note 2). A sacrifice to atone for such a violation, either by entering the Sanctuary in a state of impurity or eating sacra in such a state, is possible only if the violation occurred while the perpetrator was oblivious of his state (Lev. 5:2–3). This implies that at some earlier time he was aware of his state. If he never remembers, clearly he has no occasion to bring a sacrifice. where there is knowledge at the start and knowledge at the end but forgetting in between there is an increasing or decreasing [sacrifice]⁵⁷Depending of the perpetrator’s wealth as explained in Lev. 5:1–13.. If there was knowledge at the start but no knowledge at the end, the he-goat whose blood in brought inside⁵⁸Lev. 16:15–16. and the Day of Atonement⁵⁹If there is no Temple, the Day of Atonement protects the perpetrator from judgment by the Heavenly Court. suspend until it becomes a certainty for him and he brings an increasing or decreasing one⁶⁰The Day of Atonement suspends but does not eliminate the obligation; there is no statute of limitations..

What is the fence that Moses made around his words? It says (Exodus 19:10), “The Eternal said to Moses: Go to the people, and keep them holy, today and tomorrow.” But Moses the Righteous did not want to say this to them the way that the Holy Blessed One said it to him. So instead he said this to them (Exodus 19:15): “Prepare yourselves: for three days do not go near a woman.” Moses added an extra day for them on his own. (For this is what) Moses reasoned [to himself]: A man will go be with his wife [on the first day] and then his semen will come out of her on the third day, and then they will be [ritually] impure. And so Israel will receive words of Torah from Mount Sinai while in a state of impurity! Instead, I will add a third day for them (so that no man goes to be with his wife, and no semen will come out of her on the third day), and they will be [ritually] pure (and so they will receive Torah from Mount Sinai in a state of purity).
This is one of the things that Moses decided on his own (as a more strict ruling), and his decision was in accordance with the will of the Omnipresent God. He broke the tablets, and his decision was in accordance with the will of the Omnipresent God. He stayed outside the Tent of Meeting, and his decision was in accordance with the will of the Omnipresent God. He stayed apart from his wife, and his decision was in accordance with the will of the Omnipresent God. How so? He said to himself: If Israel need only remain in a state of holiness for a short period of time, and need only be ready to receive the Ten Commandments from Mount Sinai, and yet the Holy Blessed One said to me (Exodus 19:10), “Go to the people, and keep them holy, today and tomorrow”; then I, who am appointed [to receive the Divine Countenance] every day, at every moment, and do not know when He will speak with me, nor whether it will be during the day or at night – all the more so must I stay apart from my wife! And his decision was in accordance with the will of the Omnipresent God. Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteira said: He did not stay apart from his wife until he was told to straight from mouth of the Almighty, as it says (Numbers 12:8), “Mouth to mouth I speak to him”; that is, mouth to mouth I told him to stay apart from his wife, and so he did. Another opinion also held that Moses did not stay apart from his wife until he was told to straight from the mouth of the Almighty, [but derived it instead from these verses] (Deuteronomy 5:27–28): “Go and tell them to return to their tents,” and then after that it says, “But you stay here with Me.” So [Moses] returned [to God] and stayed apart [from his wife], and his decision was in accordance with the will of the Omnipresent God.
He stayed outside the Tent of Meeting. How so? He said to himself: If my brother Aaron, who was anointed with the anointing oil, and wrapped in [the priestly] garments, and is able to use all these things in a state of holiness, and yet the Holy Blessed One said to me (Leviticus 16:2), “Tell your brother Aaron he may not come any time he wishes into the Sanctuary”; then I, who am never allowed in – all the more so should I stay outside the Tent of Meeting! So he stayed outside the Tent of Meeting, and his decision was in accordance with the will of the Omnipresent God.
He broke the tablets. How so? They say that when Moses went up on High to receive the tablets, he found that they had already been written and set aside during the six days of Creation, as it says (Exodus 32:16), “And the tablets were the work of God, and the writing was God’s writing, engraved there upon the tablets.” (Do not read “engraved” [harut], but “freedom” [herut], for anyone who labors in Torah makes himself a free man.) At that moment, the angels who serve God pinned an accusation on Moses, saying: Master of the World, [it says] (Psalms 8:5–9), “What is the human that You should be mindful of him, the son of man that You should take note of him? You have made him a little less than God, and crowned him with glory and splendor. You have set him up to rule over Your handiwork. The world is beneath Your feet. Sheep and oxen, and all of them, and wild beasts as well. The birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea.” So they spoke behind Moses’ back and asked: Why is this one, born of an earthly woman, worthy of ascending to the heights? as it says (Psalms 68:19), “You went up to the heights, having taken captives, having taken gifts.” He took them and went down, and was overjoyed. But when he saw that they were disgracing themselves with the Golden Calf, he said to himself: How can I give them these tablets? I will be binding them in serious commandments, and causing them to deserve death from Above! For it is written on these tablets, “You shall have no other gods before Me” (Exodus 20:3). So he started to go back up. The seventy elders saw him and ran after him. He was holding on to one end of the tablets, and they grabbed on to the other end. But Moses’ strength was greater than all of theirs, as it says (Deuteronomy 34:12), “And for all the awesome power that Moses displayed before all of Israel.” (He looked and saw that the writing was flying off them, and he said: How can I give these tablets to Israel? For there is nothing on them! So instead, I will take ahold of them and smash them, as it says [Deuteronomy 9:17], “I grabbed the two tablets, and I cast them out of my two hands, and I broke them.”) Rabbi Yosei HaGalili says: I will give you a parable. To what can this be compared? [It can be compared] to a human king who said to his messenger: Go out and betroth to me a beautiful, gracious maiden, whose deeds are lovely. The messenger went and betrothed such a woman. But after he betrothed her, he went and found her cheating with someone else. He made an instant (a fortiori) judgment with himself and said: If I give her the marriage contract now, she will immediately deserve death. [So let her instead] be released from my master forever. So, too, did Moses the Righteous make an (a fortiori) judgment with himself, and said: How can I give these tablets to Israel and bind them in serious commandments and cause them to deserve death? For it is written upon them (Exodus 22:19), “One who sacrifices to any gods other than the Eternal alone will be put to death.” So instead (I will take ahold of them and smash them, and thereby return the people to good standing, lest Israel say: Where are the first tablets that you brought down? These things are counterfeit! Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteira says: Moses did not break the tablets until he was told to straight from the mouth of the Almighty, as it says [Numbers 12:8], “Mouth to mouth I speak to him” – that is, mouth to mouth I said to him: Break the tablets!) And there are others who say: Moses did not break the tablets until he was told to straight from the mouth of the Almighty, as it says (Deuteronomy 9:16), “I saw there that you had sinned against the Eternal your God.” It says only, “I saw there,” because he saw the writing flying off [the tablets]. Others say: Moses did not break the tablets until he was told to straight from the mouth of the Almighty, as it says (Deuteronomy 10:5), “[The tablets] were there, as the Eternal had commanded me.” It says only, “commanded me,” because [first] he was commanded to [break them], and then he broke them. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah says: Moses did not break the tablets until he was told to straight from the mouth of the Almighty, as it says (Deuteronomy 34:12), “…that Moses performed before all of Israel.” Just as later on he was commanded and then did, so too here, he was commanded and then did. (Rabbi Akiva says: Moses did not break the tablets until he was told to straight from the mouth of the Almighty, as it says [Deuteronomy 9:17], “I took ahold of the two tablets.” A person can take ahold only of that which he has been permitted by his Creator. Rabbi Meir says: Moses did not break the tablets until he was told to straight from the mouth of the Almighty, as it says [Deuteronomy 10:2], “That [asher] which you broke”: Well done [yishar koach] that you broke them!)¹Rashi says the language of asher, “that,” is like the language of ishur, “permission.” I think it more likely that the text is making a play on words between asher and yishar [koah], “well done.” [trans.]

³⁸Sifra Aḥare Pereq 2(5),It shall be made standing alive, This teaches that in the end it will die³⁹Lev. 16:9. Since the he-goat could not stand if he were not alive, the emphasis on “alive” in this verse implies that later it will not be alive, that it should not be let free in the desert but be thrown from a cliff.. ⁴⁰This paragraph is a slight rewrite of a paragraph in Ševuot 1:10 (Notes 127–241). How long must it live? Up to he will finish atoning the Sanctuary⁴¹Lev. 16:20. Since there can be no atonement without confession, this will include the last confession of the High Priest even though it is mentioned only in v. 21., the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, up to the moment of confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, the confession is indispensable. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, the confession is not indispensable⁴²It remains unresolved whether for R. Simeon no confession is obstructive or only the last one which is mentioned after the atonement of the Sanctuary was declared complete.. What is the difference between them? If he sent it without a confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another he-goat. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another he-goat. The same holds for the bull. If he slaughtered without confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another bull. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another bull. If he confessed, slaughtered, then the blood was spilled. Do you say, does he have to bring another bull and confess a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession? The same holds for the scapegoat; must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession⁴³It already had been stated that there has to be another drawing of lots with new animals,, the question is only about the confessions.?

The bull, the ram, and the seven unblemished sheep were brought with the daily morning offering; the remainder were brought with the daily afternoon offering⁴⁷This is the rule of R. Aqiba.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the reason of this Tanna is to join purification sacrifice to purification sacrifice and elevation sacrifice to elevation sacrifice⁴⁸Even though the he-goat as purification sacrifice is prescribed for all holidays and therefore is most frequent, as noted later in Num. 29:11 it is required that this sacrifice follow that of the he-goat whose blood was brought into the Temple, and be followed by the elevation sacrifice which is the evening daily offering. Therefore it makes sense to require the elevation offerings required by Lev. 16:3,24 to be brought after the atonement service and before the daily evening service.. But some want to say, the bull, the ram, the people’s ram, and the seven unblemished sheep were brought with the daily morning offering; the remainder were brought with the daily afternoon offering. This Tanna distributes the services. What is the reason? He leaves and brings hiselevation sacrifice and the people’s elevation sacrifice⁴⁹Lev. 16:24.. As mentioned in the matter. What is mentioned in the matter? His ram and the people’s ram⁵⁰16:3,5.. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, what is the reason for the he-goat? Of the blood of the atoning purification sacrifice⁵¹This is misquoting Ex. 30:10 when it should be Num. 29:11 : A he-goat as purification offering in addition to the atoning purification offering. Babli 70b.. The atoning purification sacrifice already preceded.

³⁸Sifra Aḥare Pereq 2(5),It shall be made standing alive, This teaches that in the end it will die³⁹Lev. 16:9. Since the he-goat could not stand if he were not alive, the emphasis on “alive” in this verse implies that later it will not be alive, that it should not be let free in the desert but be thrown from a cliff.. ⁴⁰This paragraph is a slight rewrite of a paragraph in Ševuot 1:10 (Notes 127–241). How long must it live? Up to he will finish atoning the Sanctuary⁴¹Lev. 16:20. Since there can be no atonement without confession, this will include the last confession of the High Priest even though it is mentioned only in v. 21., the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, up to the moment of confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, the confession is indispensable. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, the confession is not indispensable⁴²It remains unresolved whether for R. Simeon no confession is obstructive or only the last one which is mentioned after the atonement of the Sanctuary was declared complete.. What is the difference between them? If he sent it without a confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another he-goat. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another he-goat. The same holds for the bull. If he slaughtered without confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another bull. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another bull. If he confessed, slaughtered, then the blood was spilled. Do you say, does he have to bring another bull and confess a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession? The same holds for the scapegoat; must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession⁴³It already had been stated that there has to be another drawing of lots with new animals,, the question is only about the confessions.?

Aaron comes to the tent of Meeting⁵²Lev. 16:23.. From where does he come? From reading the Chapter. Where does he go to? To remove the cup and the pan⁵³For this he has to enter the Holiest of Holies, which only is permitted in white garments.. It is written: He leaves and brings his elevation sacrifice and the people ’s elevation sacrifice⁴⁹Lev. 16:24., and you are saying so? Did not Rebbi Joḥanan say, everybody agrees that the removal of cup and pan follows after the daily evening offering⁵⁴The last action of the High Priest is mentioned in v. 24, the offering of the remaining sacrifices of the day, which includes the daily evening offering. How can one understand R. Joḥanan’s statement since v. 23, which has to be interpreted as referring to removal of cup and pan, precedes v. 24?? Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the entire Chapter is written in order except for this verse⁵⁵Babli 70b, as Tannaitic statement.. Rebbi Yose said, even this is written in order. Aaron comes to the tent of Meeting. From where does he come? From the first sanctification which he encounters. Where does he go to? To the last sanctification⁵⁶The verse only states that the High Priest has no pause in the day’s service, from the first immersion to the last washing of hands and feet.. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yose: Why do we not say, except the last sanctification⁵⁷Since Lev. 16:23 mentions undressing the white garments but does not mention washing of any kind, whereas in vv. 4,24 it is stated that dressing requires immersion in water, would it not be logical to require washing only for dressing,. not undressing. Then R. Yose’s interpretation becomes impossible.? He answered him, there is a difference since it is written he comes, (he leaves)⁵⁸Since the other two quotes are from Lev. 16:23., this quote from v. 24 has to be deleted.,he takes off the linen garments. ⁵⁹Chapter 3:7, Note 98. Why does the verse say, which he wore? Could we ever think that he could undress what he was not wearing? Then why is it written, which he wore? It brackets undressing and dressing. Since dressing requires sanctification of hands and legs, also undressing requires sanctification of hands and legs. Rebbi Eleazar said, there is another service for which he officiates in white garments. What is it? It is removal of cup and pan⁵³For this he has to enter the Holiest of Holies, which only is permitted in white garments.. Rebbi Joḥanan says, everybody agrees that the removal of cup and pan follows after the daily evening offering⁶⁰Since in vv. 21–22 Aaron is still wearing the white garments which he put on in the morning, and in v. 24 is wearing his golden garments, there would be no reason in V. 23 to have him dress in white garments a second time. Therefore the second wearing has to be after the completion of the daily service in golden garments. The interpretation of R. Yose ben Ḥanina is the only possible one; it is compatible with the explanation which R. Yose gave to R. Mana..

Aaron comes to the tent of Meeting⁵²Lev. 16:23.. From where does he come? From reading the Chapter. Where does he go to? To remove the cup and the pan⁵³For this he has to enter the Holiest of Holies, which only is permitted in white garments.. It is written: He leaves and brings his elevation sacrifice and the people ’s elevation sacrifice⁴⁹Lev. 16:24., and you are saying so? Did not Rebbi Joḥanan say, everybody agrees that the removal of cup and pan follows after the daily evening offering⁵⁴The last action of the High Priest is mentioned in v. 24, the offering of the remaining sacrifices of the day, which includes the daily evening offering. How can one understand R. Joḥanan’s statement since v. 23, which has to be interpreted as referring to removal of cup and pan, precedes v. 24?? Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the entire Chapter is written in order except for this verse⁵⁵Babli 70b, as Tannaitic statement.. Rebbi Yose said, even this is written in order. Aaron comes to the tent of Meeting. From where does he come? From the first sanctification which he encounters. Where does he go to? To the last sanctification⁵⁶The verse only states that the High Priest has no pause in the day’s service, from the first immersion to the last washing of hands and feet.. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yose: Why do we not say, except the last sanctification⁵⁷Since Lev. 16:23 mentions undressing the white garments but does not mention washing of any kind, whereas in vv. 4,24 it is stated that dressing requires immersion in water, would it not be logical to require washing only for dressing,. not undressing. Then R. Yose’s interpretation becomes impossible.? He answered him, there is a difference since it is written he comes, (he leaves)⁵⁸Since the other two quotes are from Lev. 16:23., this quote from v. 24 has to be deleted.,he takes off the linen garments. ⁵⁹Chapter 3:7, Note 98. Why does the verse say, which he wore? Could we ever think that he could undress what he was not wearing? Then why is it written, which he wore? It brackets undressing and dressing. Since dressing requires sanctification of hands and legs, also undressing requires sanctification of hands and legs. Rebbi Eleazar said, there is another service for which he officiates in white garments. What is it? It is removal of cup and pan⁵³For this he has to enter the Holiest of Holies, which only is permitted in white garments.. Rebbi Joḥanan says, everybody agrees that the removal of cup and pan follows after the daily evening offering⁶⁰Since in vv. 21–22 Aaron is still wearing the white garments which he put on in the morning, and in v. 24 is wearing his golden garments, there would be no reason in V. 23 to have him dress in white garments a second time. Therefore the second wearing has to be after the completion of the daily service in golden garments. The interpretation of R. Yose ben Ḥanina is the only possible one; it is compatible with the explanation which R. Yose gave to R. Mana..

Why in white clothing? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, like the service up high so is the service down below. As up high, a man in their midst clothed in linen⁶⁴Ez. 9:2., so down below a holy linen shirt he shall wear⁶⁵Lev. 16:4..

⁹⁸Babli 7b, Sifra Aḥare Pereq4(1–3).“He shall atone for the Sanctuary from the impurities of the Children of Israel⁹⁹Lev. 16:16., etc. In this aspect I have three impurities. The impurity of foreign worship as it is said, to defile My Sanctuary¹⁰⁰Lev. 20:3.. Sexual offenses as it is said, not to act in the rules of abominations¹⁰¹Lev. 18.30.. Spilling of blood as it is said, do not defile the Land¹⁰²Num. 35:34, a misquote from memory.. I could think that this he-goat atones for all these impurities, the verse says, from the impurities, not all impurities¹⁰³Reading the prefix מ as partitive, cf. Note 75.. We find that the verse treated the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta separately; also here we treat only the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta separately¹⁰⁴In his opinion, the Day of Atonement is exclusively for repairing any damage to the Sanctuary., the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, from its place it is decided, as it is said, he shall atone for the Sanctuary from the impurities of the Children of Israel, any impurity in the Sanctuary. I could think that this he-goat atones for these impurities, the verse says, and their crimes⁹⁹Lev. 16:16.. These are the rebellions¹⁰⁵Intentional sins, intended as “breaking the yoke of Heaven”. There is no homily on חַטָּאוֹת “unintentional sins” also mentioned in the verse., for so it says, the king of Moab rebelled against me¹⁰⁶2K. 3:7..

⁷⁷Babli 39b, Menaḥot109b; Tosephta Sotah 13:8.. The first sentence is quoted in the next Chapter, 6:3. Simeon the Just served Israel as High Priest for forty years, and in the last year he told them, in this year I am going to die. They asked him, from where do you know? He said to them, every year when I entered the Holiest of Holies, an old man dressed in white and his head wrapped in white entered with me and left with me. But this year he entered with me but did not leave with me. ⁷⁸Cf Chapter 1, Notes 220 ff. They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written⁷⁹Lev. 16:17., nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written⁸⁰Ez. 1:10., the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting? He answered them, who tells me that it was a person? I am saying that it was the Holy One, praise to Him⁸¹In the apparition known as Shekhina..

The priest shall atone who was anointed¹⁸³Lev. 16:32. The problem is the legitimacy of a priest appointed ad hoc as High Priest to conduct the service of the Day of Atonement for which common priests are disqualified.. Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where [to include another priest? The verse says, who was anointed;]¹⁸⁴From B and the parallels in Yoma (ו) and Megillah (מ) (Note 170). The first 30 verses of the Chapter mention Aaron exclusively. not only the anointed with the anointing oil; from where the one clothed in multiple garb? The verse says, who was inducted into office. And from where another who was appointed¹⁸⁵In an emergency of the Day of Atonement where no formal session of a court can be held. Even when anointing oils was available, simple investiture ws enough.? The verse says, the priest shall atone¹⁸⁶Since it does not stress “the High Priest”, it follows that any priest can be appointed to fill the office.. How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth¹⁸⁷It does not need the laying on of hands nor a document of appointment. (Tosaphot Yoma 12b s,v. כהן).. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court for Israel.¹⁸⁸Mishnah Idiut 5:6. The oral promise was irrevocable.
Here end the parallels in Yoma and Megillah.”

HALAKHAH: He shall send him by a man⁴⁴Lev. 16:21., to qualify the non-Cohen⁴⁵Since “man” is unspecific. Babli 66a/b.. Timely⁴⁴Lev. 16:21.. that he be ready; timely, that he be prepared. Timely, even on the Sabbath; timely, even in impurity. Can he be not ready but prepared⁴⁶Ready and prepared are practically the same, the duplication is unwarranted.? But that he should not send him by two people. If he sent him by two people, does he make clothing impure⁴⁷Lev. 16:26 states that the person bringing the scapegoat to the desert becomes impure together with his clothing.? Let us hear from the following: And the one who sends⁴⁸Lev. 16:26.; not who was sending the one who sends. This implies that if he sent him by two people, it does not make clothing impure⁴⁹Only the person first appointed to the task becomes impure..

HALAKHAH: “If there is no knowledge at the start,” etc. What can you see to say? Does the one inside suspend and the one outside atone, or the one outside suspend and the one inside atone, or both of them suspend, or both of them atone¹¹²Since there are two purification sacrifices brought on the Day of Atonement, one (Lev. 16:15 ff.) whose blood is sprinkled on the gobelin separating the Temple Hall from the Holiest of Holies and the incense altar (Ex. 30:10), and one (Num. 29:11) whose blood is sprinkled on the large altar in the Temple courtyard. The question is whether each of these has a separate function or whether the day requires a double sacrifice for all its functions.? What about it? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, I saw something. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish was asking before Rebbi Joḥanan and asked him, what are the differences in atoning? I do not know what he answered him. Rebbi Ze`ira said to him, maybe it is the following: <sup>113</sup>Halakhah 2, Note 90. These are known differences in the power of atonement but have nothing to do with the Day of Atonement. How did you understand to explain it? About an impure person who ate pure [meat], or a pure person who ate impure [meat]? The verse says: his impurity is on him. Impurity of the body, not impurity of the meat. Or both of them atone? What about it? <sup>114</sup>Le v. 16:21. Babli Yoma 36b, Ševuot12b, Keritu t 25b.He should over it confess sins, these are intentional sins, their crimes, these are rebellions<sup>105</sup>Intentional sins, intended as “breaking the yoke of Heaven”. There is no homily on חַטָּאוֹת “unintentional sins” also mentioned in the verse., their mistakes, these are unintentional sins. Then He said, he will atone. Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the he-goat will carry all their sins<sup>115</sup>Lev. 16:22., he grabbed intentional sins and left out unintentional sins<sup>116</sup>In fact only rebellions are mentioned to be carried to the desert even though three kinds of transgressions were put on the scapegoat’s head., to indicate that just as intentional sins do not carry the obligation of a sacrifice, so those unintentional sins which do not carry the obligation of a sacrifice<sup>117</sup>It is not that intentional sins not carry an obligation of a sacrifice but the sinner is prohibited from offering one (Num. 15:30–31.) Unintentional sins only require a sacrifice if the corresponding intentional sin is punishable by extirpation (Mishnah Keritut 1:2), others require repentance and atonement by the Day of Atonement. Babli Keritut 25b.. And why did they come here? Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Yasa, for suspension<sup>118</sup>The commentators differ in what this means. The Day of Atonement suspends punishment to give the sinner time for repentance (Qorban Ha`edah) or the statement refers to the Mishnah that the Day of Atonement eliminates the obligation of a suspended sacrifice (Pene Mosheh). The sequel shows that neither of these alternatives applies but that the first alternative considered in the introductory paragraph applies; one purification sacrifice suspends punishment for certain categories of sins and the second atones.. Would it be understood to suspend for those who eat abominations and crawling things¹¹⁹Eating non-kosher animals is a sin (Lev. 11, Deut 14) but not one leading to extirpation. Therefore it is not subject to atonement by sacrifice.? Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: Their mistakes, their mistakes¹²⁰The first חַטֹּאתָם is in Lev. 16:21 and refers to the scapegoat and its limited power of atonement, the second one to the final statement Lev. 16:34 which declares that all mistakes are atoned for on that day.. Since their mistakes mentioned there are those which carry the obligation of a sacrifice, also their mistakes mentioned here are those which carry the obligation of a sacrifice. This excludes intentional sins which do not carry the obligation of a sacrifice. What is left out by the he-goat brought inside¹¹²Since there are two purification sacrifices brought on the Day of Atonement, one (Lev. 16:15 ff.) whose blood is sprinkled on the gobelin separating the Temple Hall from the Holiest of Holies and the incense altar (Ex. 30:10), and one (Num. 29:11) whose blood is sprinkled on the large altar in the Temple courtyard. The question is whether each of these has a separate function or whether the day requires a double sacrifice for all its functions. the Day of Atonement suspends. What did it leave out? If there is no knowledge at the start but there is knowledge at the end.¹²¹This justifies the Mishnah; both actions of the Day of Atonement are needed. Babli 10a.

HALAKHAH: He shall send him by a man⁴⁴Lev. 16:21., to qualify the non-Cohen⁴⁵Since “man” is unspecific. Babli 66a/b.. Timely⁴⁴Lev. 16:21.. that he be ready; timely, that he be prepared. Timely, even on the Sabbath; timely, even in impurity. Can he be not ready but prepared⁴⁶Ready and prepared are practically the same, the duplication is unwarranted.? But that he should not send him by two people. If he sent him by two people, does he make clothing impure⁴⁷Lev. 16:26 states that the person bringing the scapegoat to the desert becomes impure together with his clothing.? Let us hear from the following: And the one who sends⁴⁸Lev. 16:26.; not who was sending the one who sends. This implies that if he sent him by two people, it does not make clothing impure⁴⁹Only the person first appointed to the task becomes impure..

Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: And he shall wear them⁷¹Lev. 16:4, based on a metathesis -לבשם בל שם ., they shall be worn out there, there they were hidden, there they were rotting, and were not qualified for the next Day of Atonement⁷²The Babli 12b and Sifra Aḥare Pereq6(7) have another argument based on Lev.16:23.. [It was stated: Rebbi Dosa says, they were qualified for a common priest.]⁷³Addition of the corrector, possibly from the Babli 12b or Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 2(1). A common priest has to wear linen shirt and trousers for the removal of ashes from the altar; Lev. 6:3. In addition, there is the opinion, stated later in this paragraph, that the common priest’s belt also was simply linen. It was stated⁷⁴Babli 12b and Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 2(1).: Rebbi said, there are two answers in the matter; one for clothing of the High Priest, and one for clothing of the common priest. It was stated⁷⁴Babli 12b and Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 2(1).: Rebbi and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon did not disagree about the belt of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement that it was of byssus, and on all other days of the year that it contained kilaim⁷⁵A linen belt for the Day of Atonement is prescribed in Lev. 16:4, while for the golden garments the belt is made from gold thread, blue, crimson, and purple wool, and linen (Ex. 28:5,39). The belt of common priests is mentioned as necessary in Ex.28:40, but its materials are not specified ., about what did they disagree? About the belt of the common priest, where Rebbi says, it contained kilaim, but Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon says, it did not contain kilaim. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The reason of Rebbi, you shall do to Aaron and his sons so, all that I had commanded you⁷⁶Ex. 29:35.. Since the garments of Aaron contain kilaim, so also the garments of his sons contain kilaim. How does Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon explain the verse? Aaron with what is appropriate for him, and his sons with what is appropriate for them.

If he slaughtered and died⁷⁹Lev. 16:3 requires that Aaron come to the sanctuary with a bull. R. Simeon ben Laqish reads the verse as implying that any other Cohen cannot use his bull’s blood. All other authorities read the same verse as permitting the blood to another Cohen, as explained at the end of the paragraph.. May the other⁸⁰This is the late Amora usually called R. Ḥinena. Babli 49a. enter with his blood. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, with a bull, but not with its blood⁸¹Presuming that somehow the incense did not become impure by the impurity of the dead, may the replacing Cohen use the first’s fistful even though his own fist probably is of different size?. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Jonathan both are saying, even with the blood. The word of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi implies even with the blood. For Rebbi Ḥanina⁸²Lev. 16:12. For the blood it is not written “the blood which he collected”; therefore the blood is transferable., Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan , even with the blood. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi asked, if he took a fistful and then died, may one enter with his fistful⁸³Discussion of Mishnah 5.? Why does he question his fistful? For it is written, his fistful⁸Lev. 16:8., but here it is not written “his blood”⁴Standing between the two he-goats, the lot in his right hand is put on the he-goat to his right, and the one in his left on the he-goat to his left side.. It is obvious for him, even with the blood.

If he slaughtered and died⁷⁹Lev. 16:3 requires that Aaron come to the sanctuary with a bull. R. Simeon ben Laqish reads the verse as implying that any other Cohen cannot use his bull’s blood. All other authorities read the same verse as permitting the blood to another Cohen, as explained at the end of the paragraph.. May the other⁸⁰This is the late Amora usually called R. Ḥinena. Babli 49a. enter with his blood. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, with a bull, but not with its blood⁸¹Presuming that somehow the incense did not become impure by the impurity of the dead, may the replacing Cohen use the first’s fistful even though his own fist probably is of different size?. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Jonathan both are saying, even with the blood. The word of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi implies even with the blood. For Rebbi Ḥanina⁸²Lev. 16:12. For the blood it is not written “the blood which he collected”; therefore the blood is transferable., Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan , even with the blood. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi asked, if he took a fistful and then died, may one enter with his fistful⁸³Discussion of Mishnah 5.? Why does he question his fistful? For it is written, his fistful⁸Lev. 16:8., but here it is not written “his blood”⁴Standing between the two he-goats, the lot in his right hand is put on the he-goat to his right, and the one in his left on the he-goat to his left side.. It is obvious for him, even with the blood.

If he slaughtered and died⁷⁹Lev. 16:3 requires that Aaron come to the sanctuary with a bull. R. Simeon ben Laqish reads the verse as implying that any other Cohen cannot use his bull’s blood. All other authorities read the same verse as permitting the blood to another Cohen, as explained at the end of the paragraph.. May the other⁸⁰This is the late Amora usually called R. Ḥinena. Babli 49a. enter with his blood. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, with a bull, but not with its blood⁸¹Presuming that somehow the incense did not become impure by the impurity of the dead, may the replacing Cohen use the first’s fistful even though his own fist probably is of different size?. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Jonathan both are saying, even with the blood. The word of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi implies even with the blood. For Rebbi Ḥanina⁸²Lev. 16:12. For the blood it is not written “the blood which he collected”; therefore the blood is transferable., Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan , even with the blood. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi asked, if he took a fistful and then died, may one enter with his fistful⁸³Discussion of Mishnah 5.? Why does he question his fistful? For it is written, his fistful⁸Lev. 16:8., but here it is not written “his blood”⁴Standing between the two he-goats, the lot in his right hand is put on the he-goat to his right, and the one in his left on the he-goat to his left side.. It is obvious for him, even with the blood.

⁶⁸This paragraph has been copied by the corrector from B. It is neither in the scribe’s text nor in ג; it is a Babylonian addition. It is a slight rewrite of a text in Šabbat1, Notes 274–286, based on the Babylonian version of the last Mishnah in Soṭah.[“And so did Rebbi Phineas ben Yair say, promptitude brings to cleanliness, cleanliness brings to purity, purity brings to holiness, holiness brings to meekness, meekness brings to fear of sin, fear of sin brings to piety, piety brings to the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit to the Resurrection of the Dead, the Resurrection of the Dead brings to Elijah, may his remembrance be a blessing.” “Promptitude brings to cleanliness,” as it is written⁶⁹Lev. 16:20., he finishes, and he atones. “Cleanliness brings to purity,” as it is written⁷⁰Lev. 12:8., the Cohen shall atone for her, then she will be pure. “Purity brings to holiness,” as it is written⁷¹Lev. 16:19., he shall purify it and sanctify it. “Holiness brings to meekness,” as it is written⁷²Is. 57:15., for so says the High and Elevated One, Who thrones eternally, His name is Holy, in sublimity … and the oppressed and of meek spirit.“Meekness brings to fear of sin,” as it is written⁷³Prov.22:4., the consequence of meekness is fear of the Eternal. “Fear of sin brings to piety,” as it is written⁷⁴Ps. 103:17., the Eternal’s piety is eternally on those who fear Him. “Piety brings to the Holy Spirit,” as it is written⁷⁵Ps. 89:20., then You spoke in a vision to Your pious ones. “The Holy Spirit brings to the Resurrection of the Dead,” as it is written⁷⁶Ez. 37:14., I shall give My Spirit into you and you will live. “The Resurrection of the Dead brings to Elijah, may his remembrance be a blessing,” as it is written⁷⁷Misquote of Pr. 2:5., then you will understand the fear of the Eternal, and the knowledge of God you will find. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Meïr: Anybody permanently in the Land of Israel who speaks the holy language, eats its produce in purity, and recites the Shema` mornings and evenings is assured of his place in the World to Come.]

⁶⁸This paragraph has been copied by the corrector from B. It is neither in the scribe’s text nor in ג; it is a Babylonian addition. It is a slight rewrite of a text in Šabbat1, Notes 274–286, based on the Babylonian version of the last Mishnah in Soṭah.[“And so did Rebbi Phineas ben Yair say, promptitude brings to cleanliness, cleanliness brings to purity, purity brings to holiness, holiness brings to meekness, meekness brings to fear of sin, fear of sin brings to piety, piety brings to the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit to the Resurrection of the Dead, the Resurrection of the Dead brings to Elijah, may his remembrance be a blessing.” “Promptitude brings to cleanliness,” as it is written⁶⁹Lev. 16:20., he finishes, and he atones. “Cleanliness brings to purity,” as it is written⁷⁰Lev. 12:8., the Cohen shall atone for her, then she will be pure. “Purity brings to holiness,” as it is written⁷¹Lev. 16:19., he shall purify it and sanctify it. “Holiness brings to meekness,” as it is written⁷²Is. 57:15., for so says the High and Elevated One, Who thrones eternally, His name is Holy, in sublimity … and the oppressed and of meek spirit.“Meekness brings to fear of sin,” as it is written⁷³Prov.22:4., the consequence of meekness is fear of the Eternal. “Fear of sin brings to piety,” as it is written⁷⁴Ps. 103:17., the Eternal’s piety is eternally on those who fear Him. “Piety brings to the Holy Spirit,” as it is written⁷⁵Ps. 89:20., then You spoke in a vision to Your pious ones. “The Holy Spirit brings to the Resurrection of the Dead,” as it is written⁷⁶Ez. 37:14., I shall give My Spirit into you and you will live. “The Resurrection of the Dead brings to Elijah, may his remembrance be a blessing,” as it is written⁷⁷Misquote of Pr. 2:5., then you will understand the fear of the Eternal, and the knowledge of God you will find. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Meïr: Anybody permanently in the Land of Israel who speaks the holy language, eats its produce in purity, and recites the Shema` mornings and evenings is assured of his place in the World to Come.]

⁸¹Sifra Emor Pereq 14(3). Babli 81 a.“Warning about work on the day: Any work you shall not do⁸²Lev. 16:29.. Punishment, and I shall destroy this person⁸³.Lev. 23:30.. Warning about deprivation on the day, for any person who will not be deprived⁸⁴Lev. 23:29.; punishment, and this person will be extirpated⁸⁴Lev. 23:29..” There is no warning about work in the night, there is no punishment. There is no warning nor punishment written for deprivation in the night⁸⁵In both verses quoted from Lev. 23 it is stressed בְּעֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה which in general in interpreted “in full daylight” (Mekhilta dR. Ismael Bo 9.) Since the night is forbidden as is the day (Lev. 23:32), there is an obvious contradiction to be resolved..

²⁷⁴This baraita is the end of the Babylonian Mishnah Soṭah (quoted in Avodah zarah 20b); it is not in the Yerushalmi Mishnah. The entire paragraph appears in a slightly different version (adapted to the Babylonian Mishnah) in the hand of the first corrector in Šeqalim 3:4; the differences will be indicated in the Notes. The Šeqalim text, with the Babylonian version, consist- ently has the full form “a brings to b”.
There also exists a Genizah text edited by L. Ginzberg (op. cit. Note 25 p. 66ff.) which here is too fragmentary to be of much use.
The different version has the sequence cleanliness purity holiness meekness fear of sin piety Holy Spirit resurrection. In Yerushalmi sources it also is found in Cant. rabba 1(9) whereas the version in the text here is in the Munich ms. of the Babli Avodah zarah 20b. The Šeqalim text is reproduced in Midrash Prov. Chap. 15[32]. The different implications naturally require different verses.“From here did Rebbi Phineas ben Yair say, promptitude brings to cleanliness, cleanliness brings to purity, purity brings to holiness, holiness to meekness, meekness to fear of sin, fear of sin to the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit to piety, piety to the Resurrection of the Dead, the Resurrection of the Dead through Elijah, may his remembrance be a blessing.”“Promptitude to cleanliness,” he finishes, and he atones²⁷⁵It seems that the correct quote is given in Šeqalim: וְכִלָּה֙ מִכַּפֵּ֣ר he finishes to atone (Lev. 16:20). The High Priest, who has to perform all the rites of the day of Atonement unaided, has to be quick because only if he finishes all required ceremonies will there be atonement..“Cleanliness to purity,” the Cohen shall atone for her, then she will be pure²⁷⁶Lev. 12:8..“Purity to holiness,” he shall purify it and sanctify it²⁷⁷Lev. 16:19..“Holiness to meekness,” for so says the High and Elevated One, Who thrones eternally, His name is Holy, in sublimity and holiness I dwell, and the suppressed and of meek spirit²⁷⁸Is. 57:15. The verse is explained differently in the Babli, Megillah 31a..“Meekness to fear of sin,” the consequence of meekness is fear of the Eternal²⁷⁹Prov. 22:4. In the first quote, the implied meaning “consequence” is intended, in the second the original meaning “heel”.. Rebbi Isaac bar Eleazar said, what wisdom proclaimed as a crown to its head, meekness made a heel for its sandal²⁸⁰Latin solea, -ae f. “sandal”., for it is written, the head of wisdom is the fear of the Eternal²⁸¹Ps. 111:10. The usual meaning is the beginning of wisdom is …, but it is written, the heel of meekness is fear of the Eternal²⁷⁹Prov. 22:4. In the first quote, the implied meaning “consequence” is intended, in the second the original meaning “heel”..“Fear of sin to the Holy Spirit,” as it is written, then you will understand and knowledge of God you will find²⁸²Prov. 2:5..“The Holy Spirit to piety,” as it is written, then You spoke in a vision to Your pious²⁸³Ps. 89:20..“Piety to the Resurrection of the Dead,” as it is written, I shall give My Spirit into you and you will live²⁸⁴Ez. 37:14..“The Resurrection of the Dead through Elijah, may his remembrance be a blessing,” as it is written, behold I am sending to you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Eternal, that he turn the fathers’ hearts to the sons and the sons’ hearts to their fathers²⁸⁵Mal. 3:23–24..It was stated in the name of Rebbi Meïr: Anybody permanently in the Land of Israel who eats his profane food in purity, speaks in the holy language, and recites the Shemaˋ mornings and evenings is assured to participate in the life of the World to Come²⁸⁶In Šeqalim: “… eats his produce in purity, …, may be told that …”..

Following Rebbi Ismael? It shall be for you an eternal law, in the Seventh Month⁹⁷Lev. 16:29. He joined work and deprivation. Since the work which I forbade to you is work for which one is liable to extirpation, also deprivation which I forbade to you is deprivation for which one is liable to extirpation⁹⁸As required by Rav Hoshaia..

MISHNAH: He took the blood from the one who was stirring it, entered to the place where he had entered⁸³The Holiest of Holies., and stood at the place where he had stood, and sprinkled from it once upwards and seven times downwards⁸⁴As the verse prescribes (Lev. 16:14), once on the cover of the Ark and seven times in front of it.. He did not intend upwards nor downwards but like one who was spanking⁸⁵Lifting his finger to let a drop fly off, and then dropping the finger for another drop.. And so was he counting: One, one and one, one and two, one and three, one and four, one and five, one and six, one and seven. He left and put it down on the golden pedestal which was in the Temple.
They brought him the he-goat, he slaughtered it and received its blood in a bowl. He entered to the place where he had entered⁸³The Holiest of Holies., and stood at the place where he had stood, and sprinkled from it once upwards and seven times downwards. He did not intend downwards nor upwards but like one who was spanking. And so was he counting, etc.⁸⁶As detailed in Mishnah 4. He left and put it down on the second pedestal which was in the Temple. Rebbi Jehudah says, only one pedestal was there.
He took the blood of the bull, and put down the blood of the he-goat⁸⁷This Mishnah follows R. Jehudah who insists that there was only one pedestal; therefore the bowl with the bull’s blood had to be lifted before the one with the he-goat’s blood could be deposited., and sprinkled from it on the gobelin at the place of the Ark from the outside⁸⁸On the gobelin in the Temple Hall, just opposite the place of the Ark in the Holiest of Holies. and sprinkled from it once upwards and seven times downwards. He did not intend upwards nor downwards but like one who was spanking. And so was he counting⁸⁶As detailed in Mishnah 4.. He took the blood of the he-goat, and put down the blood of the bull, and sprinkled from it on the gobelin at the place of the Ark from the outside and sprinkled from it once upwards and seven times downwards. He did not intend upwards nor downwards but like one who was spanking. And so was he counting⁸⁶As detailed in Mishnah 4.. He poured the blood of the bull into the blood of the he-goat and emptied the full vessel into the empty one⁸⁹In order to improve the mixing of the two kinds of blood.. He shall go out to the altar which is before the Eternal⁹⁰Lev. 16:18/, that is the golden altar⁹¹The incense altar in the Temple Hall..

HALAKHAH: “Anything which is more frequent than another,” etc. [“If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull”,]²¹⁵From B; a necessary introduction to the following text. for one is atoning, the other is being atoned for²¹⁶This also is the reason given in the Babli (13a) for the precedence of a purification offering over a simultaneously presented elevation offering, both being most holy sacrifices.. It is preferable that the atoner precede the atoned for, as it is written, he shall atone for himself, and for his house, and for all the congregation of Israel²¹⁷Lev. 16:17. The argument really refers to the service of the Day of Atonement in its entirety, where the High Priest performs three acts of atonement, the first for himself and his family, the second for himself and the priests, and then the third for himself, the priests, and all of Israel. The priest performing the rite of atonement has to be purified himself before being able to serve others. (Tosephta Horaiot 2:4, Zevahim 10:1).. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence²¹⁸Again because the priest has to act to present the king’s gift.. Between a voluntary gift of the community and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the prince has precedence²¹⁹Since he is the representative of the community.. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, which one has precedence? Let us hear from the following: A voluntary gift of the Anointed and rams of idolatry²²⁰Cf. Chapter 1, Notes 122,135. For the number of rams, cf. Mishnah 1:6. were standing. The rams of idolatry have precedence since their blood enters inside²²¹While this is not indicated elsewhere, if the bull is identified as the bull prescribed in Lev. 4, the ram is attached to a sacrifice whose blood is brought inside the Sanctuary and which, therefore, has precedence as the more holy sacrifice.. He only said “since their blood enters inside;” this implies that between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. If there were standing the bull of idolatry, the ram which accompanies it, and another purification sacrifice. The bull precedes the ram²²²As will be explained later in this paragraph., the ram precedes the other purification sacrifice, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull²²³The bull of idolatry is defined as an elevation sacrifice which takes second place after a purification sacrifice (Note 216). The rules lead to an infinite loop.. How is this done? Rebbi Yose said, since the ram is dependent in time on the bull, it is as if the bull preceded it, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. The bull of idolatry precedes the ram because it precedes in Scripture²²⁴The bull is prescribed in the first half of Num. 15:24, the ram in the second half.. Rebbi Samuel the brother of Rebbi Berekhiah asked: But then that of the New Moon should precede the ram which comes with it because it precedes [in Scripture.²²⁵The sacrifices for the Day of the New Moon are prescribed in Num. 28:11 (elevation sacrifices) and 28:15 (the purification sacrifice). This contradicts our rule from Note 216.]²²⁶Added from B, not absolutely necessary. Rebbi Abba Mari said, you cannot do this; its purification sacrifice is defective²²⁷The argument is very elliptic. The ram of idolatry follows the bull not really because it is mentioned later in the verse, but mainly because it is spelled defective, not as חטאת but only as חטת (Babli 13a, Zevaḥim 90b). But the purification offering of the special days is directly connected with the daily offerings which start the day in the sanctuary (Num. 28:15.): After the permanent elevation offering it shall be made, with its libation; it made it lean on the permanent elevation offering. Between the sacrifice of a man and the sacrifice of a woman, the man’s sacrifice has precedence²²⁸If both are voluntary offerings of equal value. But an obligatory offering always has precedence over a voluntary one (Tosephta Zevaḥim 10:4).. That is, if both were equal. But if one was a bull and the other a lamb, it is what Rebbi Phineas said in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: A slave brings a bull and his master brings a bull, the slave’s precedes the master’s, as we have stated there: “If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull in all its ceremonies.²²⁹The argument is a non sequitur. Some commentators want to emend the text, in that the slave brings a bull but his master a goat. While this connects to the preceding, it severs the connection to the statement of R. Phineas. As a matter of principle, an emendation is totally inadmissible since the text is confirmed not only by the two independent sources here but also by Lev. Rabba 5(4) where the case of slave and master both bringing a bull follows a story about the merit of contributing to the support of scholars. As the text is presented here, one wonders why the following stories are placed here and what connection they could have with the topic of the Mishnah. But Lev. Rabba, an old text, shows that the case of slave and master is not a legal but a homiletic statement. There the argument is that the High Priest is the servant of the people; the Sanctuary is run only on behalf of the people. After the destruction of the Temple, the rabbinic establishment became the servant of the people, looking after their needs. Therefore, the rules of preference should be transferred from Temple service to the rabbinic establishment.”

HALAKHAH: “An oath that I shall not drink,” etc. In this case⁴⁷In Mishnah 5., Rebbi Simeon declares not liable. Rebbi Simeon follows his own opinion, as we have stated there⁴⁸Mishnah Makkot3:2 Notes 27–32. Tevel is produce from which heave and the heave of tithe have not been removed, whose consumption except at harvest time is a deadly sin.: “How much does he have to eat from ṭevel to be liable? Rebbi Simeon says, anything⁴⁹In R. Simeon’s opinion, biblical prohibitions are absolute, but infringing on a prohibition in a minute amount, for edibles less than the size of an olive, does not trigger the obligation of a sacrifice. Babli 24a.; but the Sages say, the volume of an olive. Rebbi Simeon told them, do you not agree that one who eats an ant is liable? They told him, because it is a creature. He answered them, also a grain of wheat is a creature⁵⁰He does not defend his point of view but shows his opponents that even in their opinion a complete fruit or animal is biblically forbidden even if it is smaller than an olive but still visible with the naked eye. This is accepted as practice, cf. Berakhot6:1, Notes 14–18..” In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, why does Rebbi Simeon declare not liable? Rebbi Ze`ira said, Rebbi Simeon follows his own opinion. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Simeon: You shall deprive yourselves⁵¹Lev. 16:29., of what is permitted to you, not of what is forbidden to you⁵²Eating non-kosher food violates a simple prohibition; breaking the fast on the Day of Atonement is a severe sin subjecting the unrepentant sinner to extirpation. R. Simeon declares eating non-kosher food on the Day of Atonement as violation of a simple prohibition (which if committed inadvertently does not make the perpetrator liable for a sacrifice). If the stringent prohibition of the Day of Atonement does not include forbidden food then an oath which never can lead to extirpation cannot include forbidden food either..

HALAKHAH: “But about where there is no knowledge,” etc. Halakhah 5: “Rebbi Simeon used to say,” etc. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: The reason of Rebbi Jehudah is and one goat’s he-goat sin offering for the Eternal¹²⁶Num. 28:15, the sacrifice of the Day of the New Moon. (The verse is quoted not quite correctly.) The root חטא in pā`al means “to sin” but in pi`ēl “to cleanse, to restitute, to purify.” The word חַטָּאת “purification” can also mean “sin” (Ex. 34:9). Here it is interpreted in both senses. Babli 9a.. This he-goat atones for a sin known only to the Eternal¹²⁷In Sifry Deut. 145, the example given is that of a an unknown grave which makes everybody stepping over it impure; the impure person never could know of his impurity.. I have not only the he-goat of the Day of the New Moon; from where the he-goats of the holidays? Rebbi Ze`ira said, and a he-goat<sup>128</sup>In all occurrences (Note 123) the sentence starts with וּ which also could have been left out. This is read as referring to the first case. Babli 9b., the copula adds to the prior subject. Rebbi Ze`ira and¹²⁹Probably “and” should be replaced by a comma. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He gave it to you to lift the sins of the congregation¹³⁰Lev. 10:17, referring to the inauguration of the Tabernacle which was on the first of Nisan. On that day, three purification sacrifices were offered. 1° A calf, special to this day. 2° A he-goat for the Day of the New Moon. 3° A he-goat by the chief of the tribe of Jehudah (Num. 7:16). The verse does not spell out to which of the three it refers.
In the Babli 9b, the entire argument is quoted as explanation of R. Simeon’s statement; also quoted Zevaḥim 101b.. Where do we hold? If about Naḥshon’s he-goat, it atoned for his tribe. If about the he-goat of the Day of (Atonement)¹³¹Read: Inauguration., there is nothing similar in later generations¹³²The reference is to the calf (Note 129, 1°) which only in this case served as public purification offering; in all other cases the sacrifice is a he-goat. Since the verse is in the singular, it follows that only one purification offering was burnt; the other two were eaten [Sifra Šemini Pereq 2(2)]. It is characterized as “given to lift the sin of the congregation”; this is asserted only of the New Moon’s Day he-goat. It follows that the calf of the Inauguration was particular for the Sanctuary and the priests, Naḥshon’s for his tribe.. But we must deal with the he-goat of the Day of the New Moon. What about it? It is said here “lifting sin” and it is said there “lifting sin”, Aaron shall lift the sin of the sancta”¹³³Ex. 28:38.. Since there it is the sinfulness of the offerings not the sins of the offerers, also here it is the sinfulness of the offerings not the sins of the offerers¹³⁴It is explicitly stated in the verse that the High Priest’s diadem is only effective to cure unknown disabilities of sacrifices, not of humans. In the Babli, Menaḥot 25a, this is the final answer by the fifth Cent. Rav Ashi after a lengthy discussion which also quotes R. Zera (Ze`ira) with a completely different suggestion which is rejected.. What did you see to say, “for the pure person who ate impure”, maybe we should say for the impure person who ate pure? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Bun said, Rebbi Jehudah splits the argument of Rebbi Meїr; Rebbi Simeon splits the argument of Rebbi Jehudah<sup>135</sup>R. Jehudah accepts the argument of R. Meїr but excludes the he-goats of the Day of Atonement from the group. R. Simeon accepts the argument of R. Jehudah but excludes the he-goat of the Day of the New Moon.. Rebbi Joḥanan<sup>136</sup>One may conjecture that originally the text read ר״י meaning “R. Jehudah” which was misread by a copyist as “R. Joḥanan”. (In Babli texts, ר״י has both meanings with about the same frequency.) agrees that the he-goat brought inside does not atone; rather it suspends. This parallels Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira, he shall make it a purification offering¹³⁷Lev. 16:9. One would have expected the sentence to read וְהִקְרִ֤יב אַֽהֲרֹן֙ אֶת־הַשָּׂעִ֔יר אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָלָ֥ה עָלָי֛ו הַגּוֹרָ֖ל לַֽײ לַחָטָּאת. Then חַטָּאת would have referred to the he-goat and meant “purification offering.” But the clause וְעָשָׂה֭וּ חַטָּֽאת “he turns it into חַטָּאת” defines the word as “unintentional sin.” The he-goat whose blood is brought into the Sanctuary turns intentional into unintentional sins.. He fixed it for suspension, that it could not be changed¹³⁸It cannot be used for any other purpose. If the companion scapegoat would die before it is slaughtered, it could not be used for any other purpose; it must be sent grazing until it develops a bodily defect or becomes too old to be used as a sacrifice, then be sold and its value used to buy other sacrifices. Sifra Aḥare Pereq 2(5)..

Rebbi Joḥanan said, so he should not err⁹⁸This refers to the way of counting as explained in Mishnah 4. Why does he have to count 1+n? Babli 55a.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, that he should finish his sprinkling with “seven”⁹⁹Since in all he has to sprinkle 8 times, it is preferable to end with “7” which is an odd number and means “luck”.. But was it not stated¹⁰⁰The prefix ק is Babylonian Aramaic. The version in which the second number precedes the first is R. Jehudah’s in Tosephta 2:14, R. Meïr’s in the Babli 55a., “seven and one”? Rebbi Abun said, it is written¹⁰¹Lev. 16:14; cf. Note 84., before the cover .. seven. Why does the verse say, he shall sprinkle? That the first sprinkling should be counted with them¹⁰²Sprinkling is mentioned separately for the blood on the cover of the Ark and the seven times in front of the Ark. Therefore they have to be mentioned separately in counting. Babli 55a..

It is written¹⁰³Lev. 16:15, about the blood of the he-goat., he shall sprinkle it on the cover. I could think on its top, the verse says, in front of the cover. I could think on its front, the verse says, on, in front of¹⁰⁴Therefore the blood of the he-goat must be sprinkled both on and in front of the cover. No numbers are indicated.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, it needs to touch; Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, it does not need to touch. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, the reason of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: he shall sprinkle it on the cover and in front of the cover. Since “the cover” mentioned there¹⁰⁵About the bull, where it is spelled out (v. 14) that the High Priest with his finger sprinkles to the East towards the front of the cover and seven times in front of the cover. means in front of but not on its top and it does not need to touch, also “the cover” mentioned here¹⁰⁶About the he-goat’s blood (v. 15). means in front of but not on its top and it does not need to touch. Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya thinks that the upwards sprinkling of the he-goat is inferred from the upwards sprinkling of the bull, but it is not so, but the upwards sprinkling of the he-goat is inferred from the downwards sprinkling of the bull¹⁰⁷Therefore the disagreement between R. Zeˋira and R. Samuel bar Rav Isaac remains open.:

¹⁰⁸Sifra Aḥare Parashah 3(3–7), Babli 55a.“He shall sprinkle it¹⁰³Lev. 16:15, about the blood of the he-goat., [in front of the cover]¹⁰⁹Unjustified addition by the corrector., this teaches that he gives a single one upwards¹¹⁰The singular “it” implies a single sprinkling.. In front of the cover, I do not know how many¹¹¹No numbers are mentioned in Lev. 16:15.. So I am arguing: It mentions giving the bull’s blood downwards, and it mentions giving the he-goat’s blood downwards. Since giving the bull’s blood downwards as mentioned is seven times¹¹²Explicit in Lev. 16:14., so giving the he-goat’s blood downwards as mentioned must be seven times. Or go in the following way: Blood is mentioned upwards and blood is mentioned downwards. Since the blood mentioned upwards is once, so the blood mentioned downwards must be once. Let us see to what it is comparable. One argues downwards from downwards; one does not argue downwards from upwards. Or go in the following way: One argues he-goat’s blood from he-goat’s blood; but one does not argue he-goat’s blood from bull’s blood. The verse says, he shall treat its blood as he treated the bull’s blood. Since the bull’s blood is downwards seven times, also the he-goat’s blood is downwards seven times. But I do not know how many times to give the bull’s blood upwards. Giving the blood upwards is mentioned for the he-goat and giving the blood upwards is mentioned for the bull. Since giving the blood upwards as mentioned for the he-goat is once, so giving the blood upwards as mentioned for the bull is once. Or go in the following way: Blood is mentioned downwards; blood is mentioned upwards. Since the blood mentioned downwards is seven, so the blood mentioned upwards must be seven. Let us see to what it is similar. One argues upwards from upwards; one does not argue upwards from downwards. Or go in the following way: One argues bull’s blood from bull’s blood; but one does not argue bull’s blood from he-goat’s blood. The verse says, he shall treat its blood as he treated the bull’s blood, that all its works be the same. Since the bull’s blood is seven times downwards, also the he-goat’s blood is seven times downwards. Since the he-goat’s blood is once upwards, also the bull’s blood is once upwards¹¹³The number of sprinklings are uniquely determined, upwards by inference from v. 15, downwards explicitly in v.14..”

The holiness¹¹⁴Lev. 16:16.. He has to aim vis-a-vis the holiness¹¹⁵This explains the statement of Mishnah 6 that blood sprinkled on the gobelin in the Temple Hall must be applied at the spot in front of the Ark.. ¹¹⁶Sifra Aḥare Pereq 3(7–8). Babli 59b.“Rebbi Nehemiah said, since we find about the bull which comes for all commandments¹¹⁷This is the expression of the verse (Lev. 4:2) to describe the purification offerings required for an anointed High Priest and the High Court; cf. Introduction to Tractate Horaiot. that he stands before the altar and sprinkles on the gobelin at the moment of his sprinkling¹¹⁸Since the High Priest is commanded to bring the blood into the Sanctuary (Lev.4:5), to sprinkle from it seven times on the gobelin (v.6), and without moving give blood on the four corners of the incense altar (v.7), it is clear that he has to stand in front of the altar and sprinkle the blood long distance in the direction of the gobelin., I could think that here it is the same; the verse says¹¹⁹Lev. 16:18: He shall exit to the altar which is before the Eternal., which is before the Eternal. Where was he¹²⁰Coming from the Holiest of Holies the High Priest stands between the gobelin and the altar.? Inside of the altar. Or does he speak only of the outer altar? The verse says, which is before the Eternal. Therefore he only speaks of the inner altar¹²¹Which is standing in the Temple hall directly opposite the ark in the Holiest of Holies..”

The holiness¹¹⁴Lev. 16:16.. He has to aim vis-a-vis the holiness¹¹⁵This explains the statement of Mishnah 6 that blood sprinkled on the gobelin in the Temple Hall must be applied at the spot in front of the Ark.. ¹¹⁶Sifra Aḥare Pereq 3(7–8). Babli 59b.“Rebbi Nehemiah said, since we find about the bull which comes for all commandments¹¹⁷This is the expression of the verse (Lev. 4:2) to describe the purification offerings required for an anointed High Priest and the High Court; cf. Introduction to Tractate Horaiot. that he stands before the altar and sprinkles on the gobelin at the moment of his sprinkling¹¹⁸Since the High Priest is commanded to bring the blood into the Sanctuary (Lev.4:5), to sprinkle from it seven times on the gobelin (v.6), and without moving give blood on the four corners of the incense altar (v.7), it is clear that he has to stand in front of the altar and sprinkle the blood long distance in the direction of the gobelin., I could think that here it is the same; the verse says¹¹⁹Lev. 16:18: He shall exit to the altar which is before the Eternal., which is before the Eternal. Where was he¹²⁰Coming from the Holiest of Holies the High Priest stands between the gobelin and the altar.? Inside of the altar. Or does he speak only of the outer altar? The verse says, which is before the Eternal. Therefore he only speaks of the inner altar¹²¹Which is standing in the Temple hall directly opposite the ark in the Holiest of Holies..”

From where that he is required to pour out¹³²Why must the blood of the bull and the blood of the he-goat be mixed before given on the corners of the golden altar; Mishnah 6. The Babli does not necessarily accept the Mishnah, 57b–58a.? The verse says¹³³Lev. 16:18, misquoted., he shall give of the blood of the bull and the blood of the he-goat, when they are mixed. I could think each one by itself, the verse says¹³⁴Ex. 30:10., Aaron shall atone on its corners once yearly, he atones once yearly, he does not atone twice yearly¹³⁵Not even one directly after the other.. Or should we say, the bull’s blood once yearly, not twice yearly? Rebbi Ismael stated, from the blood of the atoning purification offering¹³⁴Ex. 30:10., he atones once yearly, he does not atone twice yearly. Everybody agrees that for the seven sprinklings downward¹³⁶Regarding the incense altar, it is required by Lev. 16:19 that the High Priest sprinkle on its top “seven times of the blood.” Since no mention is made of bull or he-goat, the verse must refer to the mixed blood. Sifra Aḥare Pereq 4(8). he has to pour¹³⁷I. e., to mix., for it is written seven, not fourteen.

¹⁴¹This paragraph is repeated in Halakhah 6:1 (6). If he drew lots for three pairs¹⁴²Instead of one pair of he-goats there were three; for each group of sprinkling one was slaughtered while the other was alive., to give from one between the beams, from one on the gobelins, from one on the golden altar. Which of them is sent away? Rebbi Zeˋira said, to atone on him¹⁴³Lev. 16:10., one with whom one atones, the companion is sent away; one with whom one does not atone, the companion is not sent away.. Rebbi Hila said, to atone on him, one with whom one completes atonement, the companion is sent away, one with whom one does not complete atonement, the companion is not sent away. In Rebbi Zeˋira’s opinion, all three are sent away. In Rebbi Hila’s opinion, only the last one is sent away.

MISHNAH: What did he do? He split the shiny strip⁹²Which was tied to the scapegoat’s horns, Mishnah 4:2. It was expected to turn white as a sign of divine forgiveness, Is.1:18.; half of it he bound on the rock and half of it he bound between its horns. Then he pushed it⁹³The scapegoat. backwards, it rolled descending. It did not reach half of the declivity before it dissolved into limbs. He goes and sits under the last hut⁹⁴Since he left his Sabbath domain by biblical commandment, he was permitted to return the 4’000 cubits to the first hut where he could rest for the remainder of the day and found food to break the fast at nightfall. until nightfall. From when on does he make garments impure⁹⁵Lev. 16:26.? From when he exits the wall of Jerusalem; Rebbi Simeon says, from when he pushes on the crag.

HALAKHAH: Should he not start at the Southeast corner? Rebbi Hila said, right turn. This is no right turn¹⁶⁴If he stands in front of the altar to the South, he might go straight ahead to the SE corner, but if it is required that he start with a right turn by necessity he comes to the NE corner.. Should he not start at the Northwest corner? Rebbi Eleazar said, he shall leave to the altar¹⁶⁵Lev. 16:18. This is read to require that he stand in front of the altar before starting the sprinkling. Therefore he has to start to the East.. Should he not start at the Southwest corner? Not to turn his back on the Holiness¹⁶⁶Leaving the gobelins he stands in the SW between gobelin and altar. To start at the SW corner, he has to turn around.. Does he not end to turn his back on the Holiness? He was returning backwards¹⁶⁷If he starts at the NE corner, in the end he has to go from the SW to the SE corners turning his back to the Ark. Therefore he has to walk this stretch backwards, facing W. The rule of the Mishnah is the only one compatible with all constraints.. He shall stand in the South and start at the Northeast corner, as Rebbi Hila said, right turn. This is no right turn.

HALAKHAH: “They said to him, did not the teacher use to say,” etc. Rebbi Yose the Southerner said before Rebbi Jonah: Would it not have been necessary to state, if it is so then those of the Days of the New Moon could be brought on the Day of Atonement since one increases holiness but one does not diminish; but those of the Day of Atonement cannot be brought on the Days of the New Moon since one does not diminish holiness¹⁶⁹A general principle (cf. Bikkurim 3:3, Note 57; Yoma 3:8 41a l. 10, Megillah 1:12 72a l. 47, Horaiot 3:3 Note 151; Babli Yoma 12b). Since this principle cannot be overridden, it is an argument not for practice but against R. Simeon’s opinion that the sacrifices can be substituted one for the other and for R. Meїr’s that they cannot.
The argument presupposes that the cumulation of cases for which the sacrifices atone indicates a higher state of holiness.. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Bun¹⁷⁰The name tradition is impossible. The second generation R. Eleazar cannot transmit in the name of the third generation R. Bun I or the fourth generation R. Bun II. Probably one should read: R. Bun in the name of R. Elazar or even R. Yose ben R. Bun in the name of R. Eleazar. Cf. Note 24. explained it by another explanation¹⁷¹To uphold the text of the Mishnah. Since the argument is directed against one made in the Academy of R. Jonah, of the last generation of Galilean Amoraim, it should be attributed to the absolutely last Amora R. Yose ben R. Bun.: if it is so then those of the Day of Atonement could be brought on the Days of the New Moon, for included in their atoning is the atoning of the Days of the New Moon¹⁷²He asserts that all purification sacrifices have the same status of holiness but their effectiveness depends on the intent of their dedication. One sacrifice atones for all instances for which it was dedicated but none for which it was not dedicated. He must assume that the dedication was for a purification sacrifice, not for “a sacrifice whichever it will be” since the only public sacrifices of rams are purification sacrifices including the scapegoat., but those of the days of the New Moon cannot be brought on the Day of Atonement, for they atone only their atonement. For if anybody ate five olive-sized pieces of fat and dedicated four sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated five, did he atone¹⁷³Assuming that he is obligated to bring five different sacrifices for five different inadvertent sins punishable by extirpation of which eating fat is the paradigm (cf. Horaiot 3:3). If he offered only four, one sin by necessity remains without atonement.? Or if he ate four olive sized pieces of fat, dedicated five sacrifices, being of the impression that he had dedicated four, not so much more¹⁷⁴Automatically all sins are atoned for (even though one would expect the case never to happen since the owner of the sacrifice is required to confess his sin while leaning with his hands on the head of the sacrifice (Lev. 4:29), and probably would detect his error.)? And so ¹⁷⁵Tosephta 1:2.“Rebbi Simeon used to say, thirty-two rams are brought for the public every year. Thirty one outside, they are eaten. One inside which is not eaten¹⁷⁶Some of the blood of the purification offering of the Day of Atonement is brought inside the Sanctuary; the rest has to be burned outside the Sanctuary (Lev. 6:23). All other purification sacrifices must be eaten by the priests, (Lev. 6:22).. And the scapegoat. Twelve for the twelve months of the year. Eight on Tabernacles, seven on Passover, two on Pentecost, one for the day and one for the bread. One on New Year’s Day and one on the Day of Atonement.” ¹⁷⁷A similar text in Midrash Tehillim 100. It is standard Galilean doctrine that the 11 Psalms 90–100 were composed by Moses (even Ps. 99!), not only Ps. 90 as indicated by its header. In the Babylonian tradition (transmitted by prayer texts) Moses was the author of Pss. 90–91 and the Sabbath of Ps. 92. When Moses heard this he said, it follows that anybody for whom the doubt of a transgression arises should bring all these sacrifices! Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: When the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses, he shall confess¹⁷⁸Lev. 16:21. This resolved Moses’s problem and informed him that his prior concern, that the slightest doubt might impose an unbearable financial burden on the sinner, was unfounded. on it etc., he started and said, A Song of confession¹⁷⁹Ps. 100:1. Usually, one translates “a song of thanksgiving” since this is appropriate for the תוֹדָה sacrifice [Lev. r. 9(3)]., inspired by he shall confess on it.

It was stated:¹⁶⁸Tosephta 3:1, Sifra Aḥare Pereq 4(10), Babli 59a. The text here seems to be the correct one, against the three witnesses to the Babylonian text. Rebbi Eliezer says, he was standing at his place and purifying. On all of them he was giving from top to bottom except for the one he was standing in front of [in the diagonal]¹⁶⁹Addition of the corrector from the Tosephta. Greek λοξόν, “oblique”., where he was giving from bottom to top¹⁷⁰Since the top of the golden altar was only 1 cubit square, it was easily possible to sprinkle on all horns when standing in front of one corner.. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Both of them were explaining the same verse¹⁷¹Lev. 16:18. The blood must be sprinkled around; the way of delivery is not indicated., around. [The rabbis are saying, around walking. Rebbi Eliezer is saying, around]¹⁷¹Lev. 16:18. The blood must be sprinkled around; the way of delivery is not indicated. the corners.

They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written²²⁰.Lev. 16:17., nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written²²¹Ez. 1:10., the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting²²²If the offending priest was hit on his head by a calf’s foot it must have been by one of the four-headed angels seen by Ezechiel whose feet are calves’ feet (Ez.1:7)? He answered them, if he enters following normal rules

Fine¹³⁸Lev. 16:12.. What does the verse say? Because it was said, you shall pulverize it finely¹³⁹Ex. 31:36. If the entire year the incense must be a fine powder, what does the remark mean that on the Day of Atonement it be fine?. Then why is it said, fine? That it be most fine. What does he do? He separates the mina on the Eve of the Day of Atonement and returns it to the mortar to fill from it his fistful to observe “most fine.¹⁴⁰Babli 45a, Keritut_6b.”

²²³Babli 53a, Sifra Aḥare Pereq 3(11). It is written²²⁴Lev. 16:12–13. and he shall bring it inside the curtain, and put the incense in the fire before the Eternal, that he should not prepare outside and bring inside, since the Sadducees are saying, he shall prepare outside and then bring inside. If one does this before flesh and blood, a fortiori before the Omnipresent. Also it says²²⁵Lev. 16:2., for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover. The Sages said to them, has it not already been said, he shall put the incense in the fire before the Eternal; only inside he puts it on. If it is so, why was it said, for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover? This teaches that he has to put in smoke-creating herb. From where that he has to add smoke-creating herb? The verse says²²⁶Lev. 16:13., the incense shall cover the cover over the chest²²⁷Corrector’s misquote.,lest he die. If he failed to add smoke-creating herb or left out any of its ingredients he has committed a deadly sin²²⁸Babli Keritut 6a.. Lest he die, that is the punishment. For in a cloud I shall appear over the cover, this is the warning.

²²³Babli 53a, Sifra Aḥare Pereq 3(11). It is written²²⁴Lev. 16:12–13. and he shall bring it inside the curtain, and put the incense in the fire before the Eternal, that he should not prepare outside and bring inside, since the Sadducees are saying, he shall prepare outside and then bring inside. If one does this before flesh and blood, a fortiori before the Omnipresent. Also it says²²⁵Lev. 16:2., for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover. The Sages said to them, has it not already been said, he shall put the incense in the fire before the Eternal; only inside he puts it on. If it is so, why was it said, for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover? This teaches that he has to put in smoke-creating herb. From where that he has to add smoke-creating herb? The verse says²²⁶Lev. 16:13., the incense shall cover the cover over the chest²²⁷Corrector’s misquote.,lest he die. If he failed to add smoke-creating herb or left out any of its ingredients he has committed a deadly sin²²⁸Babli Keritut 6a.. Lest he die, that is the punishment. For in a cloud I shall appear over the cover, this is the warning.

²²⁹Sifra A hare Introduction (13). Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon said, I could think that punishment and warning had been said before the death of the two sons of Aaron, the verse says²³⁰Lev. 16:1., after the death of the two sons of Aaron. If after the death of the two sons of Aaron. I could think that both had been said after the death of the two sons of Aaron, the verse says, for in a cloud I shall appear over the cover. How is that? The warning was said before the death of the two sons of Aaron, but the punishment was said after the death of the two sons of Aaron, Rebbi Zeˋura said, it does not say “because in a cloud I was seen over the cover,” but I shall be seen. From here that the Holy One, praise to Him, does not punish unless he had warned²³¹The tannaitic position is rejected. While the death of the two sons of Aaron made an atonement ceremony necessary, their deaths cannot be punishment for infractions of laws not yet promulgated..

MISHNAH: How is the priestly blessing? In the countryside they recited it as three blessings¹⁷⁸Each one of the verses Num. 6:24–26 to be answered by “Amen”., but in the Temple as one blessing¹⁷⁹To be answered by the people at the end by “praised be the Name of the glory of His kingdom forever and ever”.. In the Temple one says the Name as it is written, but in the countryside by its circumlocution¹⁸⁰“The Lord” אֲדוֹנָי or κύριος.. In the countryside the Cohanim lift their hands to the height of their shoulders but in the Temple over their heads except for the High Priest who does not lift his hands over the diadem. Rebbi Jehudah says, the High Priest also lifts his hands over his head, as it is said¹⁸¹Lev. 9:22; since the ritual of blessing with raised hands is derived from this verse, it would be unreasonable to have the Cohanim not conform to Aaron’s, the High Priest’s, example.: “Aaron lifted his hands towards the people and blessed them.” How are the blessings of the High Priest¹⁸²On the Day of Atonement; cf. Mishnah Yoma 7:1.? The organizer of the synagogue¹⁸³On the Temple Mount. This is a non-scriptural ceremony, purely Pharisaic, but followed, at least since Hasmonean times, even by Sadducee High Priests. takes a Torah scroll and gives it to the president of the synagogue; the president of the synagogue gives it to the Second¹⁸⁴The second in command in the Temple after the High Priest; in effect his executive officer.; the Second gives it to the High Priest. The High priest receives it standing, he stands and reads “after the death¹⁸⁵Lev. 16:1–34, the description of the Atonement service.” and “but on the tenth¹⁸⁶Lev. 23:26–32. Winding from Chap. 17 to 23 does not take much time.”; he rolls the Torah tight, puts it in his bosom and says: More than what I read before you is written here. “And on the tenth” in Numbers¹⁸⁷Num. 29:7–11. he recites by heart, and recites eight benedictions¹⁸⁸These are detailed in Halakhah 7.: For the Torah, for the Temple service, for thanksgiving, for forgiveness of sins, for the Temple, for Israel, for the Cohanim, and the remainder of the prayer.

MISHNAH: On all of them he gives from bottom to top except the one he is standing in front of, where he gives from top to bottom¹⁷⁴This follows R. Eliezer. If he would give the blood with his finger on the horn directly in front of him from bottom to top, some blood would flow back onto his arm and dirty his white robe.. He sprinkles on the surface of the altar seven times¹⁷⁵Lev. 16:19.. The rest of the blood he poured on the Western base of the outer altar¹⁷⁶While this is not prescribed in Lev. 16, as explained in the Halakhah it is inferred from the treatment of the blood of the bull of the Anointed Priest, whose remainders have to be poured on the “base of the altar which is in front of the Tent of Meeting.” “In front of” is taken to refer to “base”, this is the Western side of the base of the altar.; those of the outer altar one pours on the southern base. This and that combine in the water canal¹⁵¹The water supply to the Temple which emptied into the Siloam pool. and leave towards the Kidron valley where it is sold to gardeners as fertilizer; one commits larceny with it¹⁷⁷The water coming out of the Temple is made to drip into the earth, where the blood is absorbed, and at the bottom clear water is reappearing. The earth enriched with the blood is sold to vegetable growers as fertilizer. Since this was part of the construction of the Temple, the Temple does not renounce proprietorship of the blood suspended in the water; therefore use of the enriched earth without paying redemption money to the Temple is stealing from Heaven’s property..

MISHNAH: He^97*The High Priest. comes to the bull and the he-goat to be burned, cut them open and removed the inner parts^98*Greek μηρία, τά, “thigh bones”, the parts of a sacrifice which have to be burned on the altar., put then into a basin and burned them on the altar. He bound them to bars and took them out to the place of burning. When do they make garments impure⁹⁹Lev. 16:28. It is implied that other priests transport the carcasses to be burned.? From the moment they leave the wall of the Temple courtyard; Rebbi Simeon says, from when the fire ignites most of them.

HALAKHAH: He shall sprinkle on it¹⁷⁸Lev. 16:19., not on its ashes. On it, not on its coals¹⁷⁹Babli 59a, Tosephta 3:2.. There are Tannaim who state, the North side. There are Tannaim who state, the South side. He who says, the North side, Rebbi Eliezer; he who says the South side, the rabbis¹⁸⁰Since for R. Eliezer the High Priest always stands at the NE corner of the golden altar. For the rabbis, he finishes giving the blood on the corners at the SE corner, when he starts to sprinkle the top seven times..

HALAKHAH: [He comes to his bull, etc.]¹⁰³Addition by the corrector, slightly misquoted (Mishnah 3:9 instead of 6:7). We have stated: “He comes to the bull and the he-goat to be burned.” There are Tannaim who state, the High Priest comes to read¹⁰⁴The public Torah reading which according to Mishnah 7:1 follows the completion of the service of purification.. Rebbi Ḥananiah said, the verse supports our Mishnah: He who sends the he-goat to Azazel shall wash his garments¹⁰⁵Lev. 16:26.. What is written next? And the purification bull and the purification he-goat¹⁰⁶Lev. 16:27. The sacrifices have to be burned outside the sacred domain.. Rebbi Mana said, it may be interpreted even following the Tanna of the baraita. If a person moves from Tiberias to Sepphoris, while he still is in Tiberias do people say, he dwells in Sepphoris¹⁰⁷All the verse indicates is that the he-goat has to be sent away before the purification sacrifices are removed from the sacred precinct; no exact time frame is given in view of the fact that the Torah reading is not biblically prescribed at this point..

HALAKHAH: [He comes to his bull, etc.]¹⁰³Addition by the corrector, slightly misquoted (Mishnah 3:9 instead of 6:7). We have stated: “He comes to the bull and the he-goat to be burned.” There are Tannaim who state, the High Priest comes to read¹⁰⁴The public Torah reading which according to Mishnah 7:1 follows the completion of the service of purification.. Rebbi Ḥananiah said, the verse supports our Mishnah: He who sends the he-goat to Azazel shall wash his garments¹⁰⁵Lev. 16:26.. What is written next? And the purification bull and the purification he-goat¹⁰⁶Lev. 16:27. The sacrifices have to be burned outside the sacred domain.. Rebbi Mana said, it may be interpreted even following the Tanna of the baraita. If a person moves from Tiberias to Sepphoris, while he still is in Tiberias do people say, he dwells in Sepphoris¹⁰⁷All the verse indicates is that the he-goat has to be sent away before the purification sacrifices are removed from the sacred precinct; no exact time frame is given in view of the fact that the Torah reading is not biblically prescribed at this point..

There¹⁹⁵Mishnah Megillah 4:5., we have stated: “One winds in Prophets¹⁹⁶In the public reading from Prophets after the Sabbath reading from the Torah, it is permissible to piece the reading together from different chapters of one prophet. but one does not wind in the Pentateuch.” One winds in one prophet, but not from one prophet to another, but among prophets of the Twelve it is permitted¹⁹⁷Since all 12 minor prophets are written together in one scroll, moving from one to the next is like winding in one of the major prophets, each of which is written in his own scroll.. But one does not wind in the Pentateuch; Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Because one does not wind the Torah in public. Rebbi Yose asked, think of it, if it was a small portion¹⁹⁸In the Palestinian 3½ year cycle, it might be that the portion was too small to be read by seven different persons; may some readers read from another place after the allotted portion was already recited?? But that Israel should hear it in its order¹⁹⁹Even if one reads more than the allotted portion on one Sabbath, it must be a continuous text.. But did we not state²⁰⁰The Mishnah here.: “He reads ‘after the death¹⁸⁵Lev. 16:1–34, the description of the Atonement service.’ and ‘but on the tenth¹⁸⁶Lev. 23:26–32. Winding from Chap. 17 to 23 does not take much time.’ ”? It is different here, because that is the order of the day²⁰¹This is a holiday reading, not a Sabbath reading; it has to concentrate on the texts dealing exclusively with that holiday.. Know that it is so since Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one does not recite by heart, and here he recites by heart²⁰²From the text too far removed to be wound without inconveniencing the public.. Rebbi Yose commanded Bar Ulla, the organizer of the congregation of Babylonians: When the Torah has been brought back, wind it behind the curtain²⁰³In Yoma, the text reads: כַּד דְּהִיא חָדָא אוֹרִיָּא תְּהֵא גַייֵל לָהּ לְהָדֵי פָרוֹכְתָא. “When you have only one Torah, wind it by the curtain.” The text here is preferable since a good organizer will wind the Torah well before it is used the next time. The editors who mishandled the text, replacing the text here by that from Yoma in modern editions, probably never were Torah readers themselves.. If there are two, return one and bring the other²⁰⁴This is not the common usage where one takes out both scrolls and reads from them one after the other. This shows that in Babylonia already in Talmudic times one read from two different scrolls at special occasions (in particular, holidays). One has to correct the statement by Elbogen (cf. Note 205, p. 127) that this practice is not recorded before Rav Yehudai Gaon..

Samuel said, both for undressing and for dressing are for the future¹⁰⁰The sanctifications at a change of dress are not biblical. According to the reason given for the rabbis’ position, both are intended for the next step in the service.. Bar Qappara said, one for the future and one for the past, both for dressing¹⁰¹For him, each step in the service needs sanctification before and after. The second sanctification is not for taking off the garments but for the garments he is wearing at the moment of sanctification.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, everybody agrees that the first sanctification is for the future¹⁰²The first sanctification at the start of the morning service is a biblical requirement, Ex. 30:21. Therefore there is no requirement of sanctification when the High Priest takes off his profane clothing.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, everybody agrees that the first sanctification is obstructive¹⁰³Without this sanctification, the High Priest would be disqualified from serving.. What is the reason? An eternal law for your generations¹⁰⁴A misquote from Ex. 30:21.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, everybody agrees that the last sanctification is for the past. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah¹⁰⁵Mishnah 7:4. says so. “They bring him his own clothing and he dresses.” Does anybody sanctify his hands and legs to wear profane clothing? Rebbi Joḥanan said, and he shall wear them¹⁰⁶Lev. 16:4.. The dressing is obstructive¹⁰⁷Obviously he cannot serve naked, but the emphasis is on wear them: all four garments enumerated in the verse form an inseparable unit., but sanctification of hands and legs is not obstructive. And similarly, the dressing is obstructive, but sanctification of hands and legs is not obstructive¹⁰⁸All changes of dress during the day are biblical prescriptions but the accompanying sanctifications (except the first, as stated) are required but their omission does not disqualify. Babli Zevaḥim 19b..

Rebbi Aḥa said: Solomon said, three things I desecrated where I got the better of the law¹⁸¹Eccl. r. 2(3), Tanhuma Aḥare Mot 1, Tanhuma Buber Ahare Mot 2, Pesiqṭa dR. Cahana(Buber) Ahare Mot 168b–168a.
Most of the verses quoted in these paragraphs are also quoted in the Babli, 21b. Cf. also Cant. rabba 1(10).. He shall not add wives, and it is written: King Solomonloved foreign women¹⁸²1K. 11:1.. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai said, he really made love to them immorally¹⁸³He did not marry them but slept with them unmarried to increase his sexual enjoyment.. Ḥananiah, Rebbi Joshua’s nephew, says, because you shall not intermarry with them¹⁸⁴Deut. 7:3. He agrees with R. Simeon ben Iohai and notes that by behaving immorally he avoided violating the law. In Num. r. 10(8) only Hanania and R. Yose are mentioned.. Rebbi Yose said, to draw them to the words of the Torah and bring them under the Wings of the Divine Presence¹⁸⁵He married all those women with good intentions but violated Deut. 17:17. The expression “to take shelter under the Wings of the Divine Presence” for “to convert to Judaism” is from Ru. 2:12.. Rebbi Eliezer said, because also the foreign wives made him sin¹⁸⁶Neh. 13:26. He violated Mishnah 7 according to all authorities quoted there.. It turns out that one may say that Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai, Ḥananiah, and Rebbi Eliezer mean the same. Rebbi Yose disagrees with all three of them.

From where the arrangement of the Day of Atonement¹⁵⁶That the wood on the altar has to be prepared specially for the requirements of the day and therefore needs an extra arrangement, in addition to the daily ones.? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Pedat: Coals¹⁵⁷Lev. 16:12.. Why does the verse say, of fire? That it should be insignificant on its coals. ¹⁵⁸Sifra Aḥare Pereq 3(5); Babli Pesaḥim 75b.. The following text is Tannaitic, not of the sayings of R. Jeremiah. It is missing in a Genizah fragment (Ginzberg, p. 118) and therefore may be a later addition. This explains the reduplication of the argument.“Coals, I could think smouldering; the verse says of fire. If of fire, I could think flames; the verse says coals of fire, from those crackling ones. And from where that the fire should be insignificant on the coals? The verse says, coals of fire.”

כדי¹⁰⁹This is misspelled for בד “linen cloth”. that they should be double¹¹⁰This is a discussion of a bardita reported in Sifra Aḥare Pereq 1(5), Babli Zevaḥim 18b. The word “linen cloth” is repeated four times in Lev. 16:4. One of these is necessary to establish that the High Priest has to wear four linen garments; the other three are read to imply that the garments should be of byssus (expensive), new, and double (not transparent, in the Babli’s version, woven from entwined thread.). We determined that this does not follow Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac did not come to the assembly hall. He met Rebbi Zeˋira and asked him, what did you newly find [was for you in the house of study]¹¹¹The text in parentheses was added by a corrector who did not understand the text. The addition is in the usual Babli style in this situation. on that day? He told him, linen cloth, that they should be double. We determined that this does not follow Rebbi Yose¹¹²Since the discussion centers on a baritta, the discovery of the Amoraim was that the baratta cannot be R. Yose’s.. As it was stated, and for Aaron’s sons you shall make coats¹¹³Ex. 27:40.. The rabbis say, two coats for each one; Rebbi Yose says, even one coat for each one. What is the rabbis’ reason? And for Aaron’s sons you shall make coats. What is Rebbi Yose’s reason? Make coats for 100 sons of Aaron. Linen cloth, that they should be new¹¹⁰This is a discussion of a bardita reported in Sifra Aḥare Pereq 1(5), Babli Zevaḥim 18b. The word “linen cloth” is repeated four times in Lev. 16:4. One of these is necessary to establish that the High Priest has to wear four linen garments; the other three are read to imply that the garments should be of byssus (expensive), new, and double (not transparent, in the Babli’s version, woven from entwined thread.). If you are saying that they should not be worn out, was it not stated, and he shall wear them¹⁰⁶Lev. 16:4., even if they are worn out? Rebbi Ḥananiah in the name of Rebbi Yasa, as the disagreement¹¹⁴R. Yose (the Tanna) does not accept that the garments have to be new every year. The Babli 12b attributes the disagreement to other Tannaim..

When he finished atoning the sanctuary¹⁸⁸Lev. 16:20.. There are Tannaim who state, when he finished, he atoned¹⁸⁹If he correctly finished the ceremonies, automatically he atoned. Cf. Babli 60b. There are Tannaim who state, when he atoned, he finished¹⁹⁰Only if he did everything required for atoning he is finished.. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They differ by disagreement. He who said, when he atoned, he finished, the remainder is obstructive¹⁹¹If the remaining blood is not poured on the Western base of the exterior altar, the interior ceremonies are invalid. Babli, Zevaḥim 111a.. He who said, when he finished, he atoned, the remainder is not obstructive. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, they differ in understanding. About the remainder (is it obstructive?), the remainder is not obstructive. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, the remainder is not obstructive. How is this? He who said, when he finished, he atoned, makes it four givings¹⁹²There are four ceremonies: Blood in the Holiest of Holies, on the gobelins, on the corners of the interior altar, and on its top. If one of them is invalid, it has to be repeated.. He who said, when he atoned, he finished, makes it only one giving¹⁹³If part is invalid, the entire ceremony has to be repeated from the start..

¹⁸¹Eccl. r. 2(3), Tanhuma Aḥare Mot 1, Tanhuma Buber Ahare Mot 2, Pesiqṭa dR. Cahana(Buber) Ahare Mot 168b–168a.
Most of the verses quoted in these paragraphs are also quoted in the Babli, 21b. Cf. also Cant. rabba 1(10). It is written¹⁹³Eccl. 2:2.: To amusement I said, be praised. The Holy One, praise to him, said to Solomon: What is this crown on your head? Descend from My throne! Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, at that moment an angel came down looking like Solomon, removed him from his throne, and sat in his stead. He was going around in synagogues and houses of study, saying I am Ecclesiastes, I used to be king over Israel in Jerusalem¹⁹⁴Eccl. 1:12.. They were telling him, the king sits on his chair of honor¹⁹⁵Latin bisellium; cf. Löw in Krauss’s Lehnwörter. and you say, I am Ecclesiastes? They hit him with a stick and brought a dish of split beans before him. At that moment, he said: that is my part¹⁹⁶Eccl. 2:10.. Some say, a staff. Others say, a rod. Others say, with his belt. ¹⁹⁷Cant. r. ad 5:10, Lev. r. 19(2), Ex. r. 6(1). Solomon is accused of wanting to remove the imperative from Deut. 17:17. Who had accused him? Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, י in יַרְבֶּה¹⁶⁰2S. 23:15–16; 1Chr. 11:17–18. accused him. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: The book Deuteronomy ascended, bowed down before the Holy One, praise to Him, and said to Him: Master of the Universe, You wrote in Your Torah that any disposition¹⁹⁸Greek διαθήκη “will, disposition”. which is partially invalid is totally invalid, and now Solomon wants to uproot a י from me! The Holy One, praise to Him, said to it: Solomon and a thousand like him will disappear but nothing from you will disappear.

They asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Is it not written¹²⁶Lev. 16:17., nobody shall be in the Tent of Meeting during his coming to atone in the sanctuary until he leaves, not even those about whom it is written¹²⁷Ez. 1:10. If the offending priest was hit on his head by a calf’s foot it must have been by one of the four-headed angels seen by Ezechiel whose feet are calves’ feet (Ez. 1:7)., the shapes of their faces are human shapes shall not be in the Tent of Meeting? He answered them, if he enters following normal rules.

But is not second quality of Pelusian better than first Indian¹³⁴Then why does the Mishnah not require second quality Pelusian linen for the afternoon service?? A formulation which is an exaggeration¹³⁵Arabic فرط “excess, exaggeration”. The Mishnah is formulated to give leeway in the choice of materials.. There, we have stated¹³⁶Mishnah Menaḥot8:5, about the oil qualified for the lamp and the flour sacrifices in the Temple. Since the Mishnah is known, the corrector’s addition is not absolutely necessary.: “Nothing is better than the best of first quality. [Second tier of the first and first tier of the second are equal.]” But is not the second tier of first quality better than the first of second quality? A formulation which is an exaggeration. What about it? Rebbi Nahman in the name of Rebbi Mana: In the morning, linen is written four times. In the afternoon, linen is written¹³⁷In Lev. 16:23 linen is mentioned only once, in contrast to 4 times in v. 4..

¹⁴⁸Bulls and he-goats to be burned.And he who burns¹⁴⁹Lev. 16:28.. Not the one who starts the fire, and not the one who prepares the stake. Who is he who burns? That is the one who helps during the burning. [Rebbi Yose said, this implies that the one who helps during the burning]¹⁵⁰Corrector’s addition. makes his garments impure. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: One who turns over an olive-sized piece¹⁵¹Less than this amount is not considered “consumed”. makes his garments impure. The problem is only one who stands inside¹⁵²The Temple domain, or possibly the city of Jerusalem. and in his hand is a beam with which he turns over an olive-sized piece, [what is the rule]¹⁵³Unnecessary corrector’s addition.? Let us hear from the following: And he shall take out, and he shall burn¹⁵⁴Lev. 4:12, about the Anointed Priest’s bull.. Since one who takes out, only after he took to the outside, also he who burns only if he burns outside¹⁵⁵Since the two expressions are written in the same verse.. There¹⁵⁶About burning the carcass of the Red Cow. Ḥizqiah said, he shall be impure until the evening¹⁵⁷Num. 19:7.; to include him who burns¹⁵⁸Even though the verse speaks only of the Cohen who directs the ceremony, all his helpers are included.. Here it is the same¹⁵⁹About bulls and he-goats to be burned; Sifry Num. 124..

MISHNAH: Together Israel, Cohanim, and the Anointed Priest²²⁵This fraction of a sentence is the end of the preceding Mishnah. The scapegoat atones equally for Israel, Cohanim and the High Priest. The expression “Anointed Priest” is biblical (Lev. 6:15); as explained in Tractate Horaiot it excludes the High Priests of the Second Temple who were invested, not anointed.. What is the difference between Israel and a Cohen or the Anointed Priest²²⁶There is a difference not only on the Day of Atonement, but all year round: the purification offering of the Anointed Priest (not the invested one) is a bull, but everybody else’s a lamb. For impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta, everybody has to bring a sacrifice depending on his wealth except the Anointed Priest who is exempt (Mishnah Horaiot 2:7).? Only that the blood of the bull atones for Cohanim in matters of the Sanctuary and its sancta. Rebbi Simeon says, just as the blood of the he-goat which is brought inside atones for Israel, so the blood of the bull atones for the Cohanim²²⁷The actual atoning sacrifices on the Day of Atonement are separate for the High Priest (Lev. 16:6), the common priests (v. 13), and the people. But for the action of the scapegoat they are all equal.. Just as the confession of the scapegoat²²⁸Lev. 16:21. atones for Israel, so the confession of the bull atones for Cohanim²²⁹He disagrees with the anonymous Mishnah and restricts the action of the scapegoat to the benefit of the people..

MISHNAH: They told the High Priest that the he-goat arrived in the desert. And from where did they know that the he-goat arrived in the desert? They had overseers¹⁰⁰Greek διάδοχοι, οἱ. posted who waved sheets and they knew that the he-goat had arrived in the desert.
Rebbi Jehudah said, did they not have an important sign? There are three mil from Jerusalem to Bet Horon¹⁰¹Even though this text is confirmed by Maimonides’s autograph Mishnah, it seems impossible since Bet Horon is NE of Jerusalem in inhabited territory. The Babli’s reading, Bet Hidud seems more appropriate; it may designate Wadi al-Hoḏ. R. Jehudah does not require the he-goat to be on the crag, only outside agricultural land.; they were walking one mil, returning one mil, and waiting for another mil; then they knew that the he-goat had arrived in the desert. Rebbi Ismael said, did they not have another sign? A shiny strip was tied to the door of the Temple hall; when the he-goat arrived in the desert it turned white¹⁰²He disputes the fact that the strip was no longer tied to the Temple door., as it is said⁹⁵Lev. 16:26., if your sins were like crimson they will be white like snow.

MISHNAH: He comes to his bull¹⁴¹The bull to be sacrificed which he is required to provide from his own money; Lev. 16:3, 6.; his bull was standing between the Temple Hall and the altar, its head to the South and its face to the West¹⁴²The bull’s body was standing North to South but its head was bent to the West, facing the Temple Hall., and the Cohen standing in the East with his face to the West. He leans his hands on it¹⁴³Between its horns. and confesses, and thus he was saying: “Please Hashem¹⁴⁴“The Name”, the generally accepted sobriquet for the Divine Name, whose correct pronunciation was taught only to the High Priest and which he only used on the Day of Atonement in his confessions., I acted criminally, I offended, I sinned¹⁴⁵As explained in the Halakhah, עָוֹן is a criminal act, פֶּשַׁע is an intentional sin, and חֵטְא is an unintentional sin. before You, I and my house. Please Hashem, please atone the criminal acts, and the offenses, and the sins, by which I offended, acted criminally, and sinned before You, I and my house, as is written in the Torah of Your servant Moses¹⁴⁶Lev. 16:30., because on that day He will atone for you, etc.” They¹⁴⁷The priests and the people standing in the outer courtyards. answer him: “Praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever” He comes to the Eastern part of the courtyard, North of the altar¹⁴⁸The prescribed place of slaughter of all most holy sacrifices.; the executive officer¹⁴⁹The person overseeing the daily routine in the Temple. to his right and the head of the serving family¹⁵⁰The Cohanim were divided into 24 watches; each watch came to the Temple for one week to serve there (except for a few permanent offices, enumerated in Tractate Šeqalim.) Each watch was divided into 6 families; each family serving for one day, except for the Sabbath when the entire watch were serving together. The head of the family serving on the day of Atonement accompanies the High Priest. to his left. There were two he-goats,¹⁵¹Lev. 16:8. and an um¹⁵²Greek κάλπη. was there with two lots in it. They were of boxwood but Ben Gamia¹⁵³The High Priest Joshua ben Gamia, contemporary of king Agrippa I, who instituted universal Jewish compulsory elementary education. made them from gold; he was remembered for praise.

MISHNAH: If somebody say, “I shall sin and repent, I shall sin and repent,¹⁹⁰Repeatedly” one¹⁹¹Heaven does not let him achieve to repent. “I shall sin and the day of Atonement will atone,” the Day of Atonement does not atone. Transgressions between a person and the Omnipresent the Day of Atonement atones; but those between him and his neighbor the Day of Atonement does not atone unless he placated his neighbor.
The following did Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah explain: Of all your unintentional sins before the Eternal you shall be cleansed¹⁹⁹Lev. 16:30. The sentence is not parsed as from all your iniquities, before the Eternal you will be cleansed, but as from all your iniquities before the Eternal, you will be cleansed. Sifra Aḥare Pereq 8:1.. Transgressions between a person and the Omnipresent the Day of Atonement atones; but those between him and his neighbor the Day of Atonement does not atone unless he placated his neighbor.
Rebbi Aqiba said, blessed are you, Israel. Before whom do you cleanse yourselves, and who cleanses you? Your Father Who is in Heaven, as it is said²⁰⁰Ez 36:25., I shall sprinkle on you pure water, so you shall be pure. And it is said²⁰¹Jer. 17:13. Israel’s hope is the Eternal, since a miqweh purifies the impure people²⁰²Identifying מקוה “hope” or “ritual bath; pond”., so the Holy One, praise to Him, cleanses Israel.

MISHNAH: He comes to his bull¹⁴¹The bull to be sacrificed which he is required to provide from his own money; Lev. 16:3, 6.; his bull was standing between the Temple Hall and the altar, its head to the South and its face to the West¹⁴²The bull’s body was standing North to South but its head was bent to the West, facing the Temple Hall., and the Cohen standing in the East with his face to the West. He leans his hands on it¹⁴³Between its horns. and confesses, and thus he was saying: “Please Hashem¹⁴⁴“The Name”, the generally accepted sobriquet for the Divine Name, whose correct pronunciation was taught only to the High Priest and which he only used on the Day of Atonement in his confessions., I acted criminally, I offended, I sinned¹⁴⁵As explained in the Halakhah, עָוֹן is a criminal act, פֶּשַׁע is an intentional sin, and חֵטְא is an unintentional sin. before You, I and my house. Please Hashem, please atone the criminal acts, and the offenses, and the sins, by which I offended, acted criminally, and sinned before You, I and my house, as is written in the Torah of Your servant Moses¹⁴⁶Lev. 16:30., because on that day He will atone for you, etc.” They¹⁴⁷The priests and the people standing in the outer courtyards. answer him: “Praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever” He comes to the Eastern part of the courtyard, North of the altar¹⁴⁸The prescribed place of slaughter of all most holy sacrifices.; the executive officer¹⁴⁹The person overseeing the daily routine in the Temple. to his right and the head of the serving family¹⁵⁰The Cohanim were divided into 24 watches; each watch came to the Temple for one week to serve there (except for a few permanent offices, enumerated in Tractate Šeqalim.) Each watch was divided into 6 families; each family serving for one day, except for the Sabbath when the entire watch were serving together. The head of the family serving on the day of Atonement accompanies the High Priest. to his left. There were two he-goats,¹⁵¹Lev. 16:8. and an um¹⁵²Greek κάλπη. was there with two lots in it. They were of boxwood but Ben Gamia¹⁵³The High Priest Joshua ben Gamia, contemporary of king Agrippa I, who instituted universal Jewish compulsory elementary education. made them from gold; he was remembered for praise.

²³⁷This paragraph is Yoma 6:2. However, there the sequence of topics is different. Sifra Aḥare Pereq 2(6–8).Shall be stationed alive; this teaches that it the future it is going to die²³⁸Lev. 16:10. Since the verse later only requires that the scapegoat be sent to a cliff (v. 22) in the desert (v. 21), but nothing is said what happens to the goat there, it is inferred that since it is emphasized that it must be alive as long as it is standing before the Eternal that later it will not continue to live, but will be pushed over the cliff to its death (Sifra Aḥare Pereq 2(7,8), Yoma 6:2, Babli Yoma40b,65a,71a.. How long must it live? Up to he will finish from atoning to Sanctuary²³⁹Lev. 16:20. If the scapegoat dies before the blood of the other he-goat was sprinkled on the gobelin and the incense altar in the Sanctuary, the ceremony has to be repeated. Later, no new he-goat has to be provided., the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, up to the moment of confession²⁴⁰Until after the High Priest leaves the sanctuary to put his hands on the scapegoat to confess the people’s sins (v. 21). If the he-goat dies at the moment the High Priest starts to put his hands on its head, no new he-goat is needed.. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, the confession is indispensable²⁴¹Since neither the blood of the bull nor that of the he-goat may be brought inside the Sanctuary without prior confession (v. 11) the scapegoat may not be sent to the desert without confession; without a scapegoat the atoning is not complete.. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, the confession is not indispensable²⁴²Since for him the High Priest only has to stand next to the scapegoat, the final confession itself is needed only if the scapegoat is alive at that time.
Commentators note that the Babli Yoma 40b seems to switch the positions of RR. Jehudah and Simeon in this matter, but since Sifra parallels the Yerushalmi this seems to be unlikely. Maimonides does not mention the matter in his Code.. What is the difference between them? ²⁴³This is a non sequitur. But in the Yoma text, which has to be considered as original, the scapegoat is treated first, i. e., that a scapegoat sent away without confession for R. Jehudah requires an entire new ceremony with formal confession, but not for R. Simeon. Then it is asserted that by analogy if the bull whose blood is to be brought into the Sanctuary was slaughtered without confession, for R. Jehudah the slaughter is invalid and the entire ceremony has to be repeated, but not for R. Simeon. If he slaughtered without confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another bull. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another bull. The same holds for the scapegoat. If he sent it without a confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another goat. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another goat. If he confessed, slaughtered, then the blood was spilled. Do you say, does he have to bring another bull and confess a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession²⁴⁴If the bull was slaughtered correctly but for some reason its blood could not be brought into the Sanctuary, does R. Jehudah require a full repetition of the ceremony including confession?? The same holds for the scapegoat; must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession²⁴⁵If the scapegoat dies before it can be sent away, one needs a replacement. May one bring a single he-goat as replacement or does one have to bring two he-goats, cast new lots, use one as scapegoat and let the other one graze until it develops a bodily defect when it can be sold and one buys other sacrifices with the money? With the Yoma text one has to read:
צָרִיךְ לְהַגְרִיל פַּעַם שְׁנִייָה אוֹ כְבָר יָצָא בְּהַגְרִילוֹ
שֶׁלָּרִאשׁוֹן.
“Must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first casting of lots?” (Babli Yoma 39b/40a.)?

Rebbi Joḥanan said, we do not find that slaughter be qualified¹⁶¹This must read “disqualified” since Mishnah Zevaḥim 3:1 states without dissent that slaughter of sacrifices by a Non-Cohen, a woman, or a slave, is qualified. by a non-Cohen. Rav commanded his students, everywhere state “he slaughters”, but for the Cow¹⁶²The Red Cow (Num. 19). Here one has to switch the places of “slaughters” and sprinkles.” Rav instructed that in baraitot specifying where a Cohen is indispensable, it always should mention sprinkling (mostly pouring the blood on the altar) but not slaughtering. But he requires that the Cow be slaughtered by a Cohen even though Num. 19:3 states only that somebody has to slaughter the Cow in the Cohen’s presence. state “sprinkles”; and Rebbi Joḥanan said, we do not find that slaughter be (qualified) [disqualified]¹⁶³The text in parentheses is the scribe’s, consistent with his earlier text, but materially wrong. The text in brackets is the corrector’s; its correctness is shown by the following argument of R. Ḥiyya bar Abba. by a non-Cohen. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba objected. Is it not written, he slaughters, he sprinkles¹⁶⁴Num. 19:3, 4. This sprinkling is not that of water with the ashes of the Red Cow, but of its blood, and the verse specifies that it has to be done by the Cohen.? Since sprinkling is not qualified by a woman as by a man¹⁶⁵The main thrust of Num. 19:18 is that it describes a rite which does not require a Cohen., also slaughter is not qualified by a woman as by a man. He said to him, but sprinkling always was qualified by a Non-Cohen and disqualified by a woman¹⁶⁶If slaughter of sacrifices is permitted to laymen, why is the High Priest burdened with slaughter in addition to all his other duties on that day?. He answered him, there “Cohen” is not written¹⁶⁷Lev. 16:15. While in the case of the bull, Aaron is only commanded to sacrifice(v. 6), in the case of the he-goat it is spelled out that he has to slaughter. There is more reason to require the High Priest to personally slaughter the he-goat than the bull.. For which purpose is written a man? To qualify a non-Cohen. There is no difference between man and woman. If you are saying that it is qualified by a non-Cohen, it has to be qualified by a woman.

²³⁷This paragraph is Yoma 6:2. However, there the sequence of topics is different. Sifra Aḥare Pereq 2(6–8).Shall be stationed alive; this teaches that it the future it is going to die²³⁸Lev. 16:10. Since the verse later only requires that the scapegoat be sent to a cliff (v. 22) in the desert (v. 21), but nothing is said what happens to the goat there, it is inferred that since it is emphasized that it must be alive as long as it is standing before the Eternal that later it will not continue to live, but will be pushed over the cliff to its death (Sifra Aḥare Pereq 2(7,8), Yoma 6:2, Babli Yoma40b,65a,71a.. How long must it live? Up to he will finish from atoning to Sanctuary²³⁹Lev. 16:20. If the scapegoat dies before the blood of the other he-goat was sprinkled on the gobelin and the incense altar in the Sanctuary, the ceremony has to be repeated. Later, no new he-goat has to be provided., the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Simeon says, up to the moment of confession²⁴⁰Until after the High Priest leaves the sanctuary to put his hands on the scapegoat to confess the people’s sins (v. 21). If the he-goat dies at the moment the High Priest starts to put his hands on its head, no new he-goat is needed.. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, the confession is indispensable²⁴¹Since neither the blood of the bull nor that of the he-goat may be brought inside the Sanctuary without prior confession (v. 11) the scapegoat may not be sent to the desert without confession; without a scapegoat the atoning is not complete.. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, the confession is not indispensable²⁴²Since for him the High Priest only has to stand next to the scapegoat, the final confession itself is needed only if the scapegoat is alive at that time.
Commentators note that the Babli Yoma 40b seems to switch the positions of RR. Jehudah and Simeon in this matter, but since Sifra parallels the Yerushalmi this seems to be unlikely. Maimonides does not mention the matter in his Code.. What is the difference between them? ²⁴³This is a non sequitur. But in the Yoma text, which has to be considered as original, the scapegoat is treated first, i. e., that a scapegoat sent away without confession for R. Jehudah requires an entire new ceremony with formal confession, but not for R. Simeon. Then it is asserted that by analogy if the bull whose blood is to be brought into the Sanctuary was slaughtered without confession, for R. Jehudah the slaughter is invalid and the entire ceremony has to be repeated, but not for R. Simeon. If he slaughtered without confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another bull. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another bull. The same holds for the scapegoat. If he sent it without a confession. In Rebbi Jehudah’s opinion, he must bring another goat. In Rebbi Simeon’s opinion, he does not have to bring another goat. If he confessed, slaughtered, then the blood was spilled. Do you say, does he have to bring another bull and confess a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession²⁴⁴If the bull was slaughtered correctly but for some reason its blood could not be brought into the Sanctuary, does R. Jehudah require a full repetition of the ceremony including confession?? The same holds for the scapegoat; must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first confession²⁴⁵If the scapegoat dies before it can be sent away, one needs a replacement. May one bring a single he-goat as replacement or does one have to bring two he-goats, cast new lots, use one as scapegoat and let the other one graze until it develops a bodily defect when it can be sold and one buys other sacrifices with the money? With the Yoma text one has to read:
צָרִיךְ לְהַגְרִיל פַּעַם שְׁנִייָה אוֹ כְבָר יָצָא בְּהַגְרִילוֹ
שֶׁלָּרִאשׁוֹן.
“Must he cast lots a second time or did he do his duty with the first casting of lots?” (Babli Yoma 39b/40a.)?

Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Iohai. The bull of the Day of Atonement requires a Cohen.¹⁶⁶If slaughter of sacrifices is permitted to laymen, why is the High Priest burdened with slaughter in addition to all his other duties on that day? But why does he not say, “and the he-goat”? That is the verse, and he slaughters, and he brings¹⁶⁷Lev. 16:15. While in the case of the bull, Aaron is only commanded to sacrifice(v. 6), in the case of the he-goat it is spelled out that he has to slaughter. There is more reason to require the High Priest to personally slaughter the he-goat than the bull.. Since bringing is by a Cohen, also the slaughter is by a Cohen. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Yasa, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Iohai. The bull and the he-goat of the Day of Atonement require a Cohen.

The rabbis say, three for qualification and three for disqualification. Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon are saying, 43 for qualification and 43 for disqualification²³⁹For the rabbis each group of sprinkling, in the Holiest of Holies, on the gobelins, and on the altar, forms a unit. If anything was incomplete or disqualifying in one of the actions, the entire action must be repeated. For R. Eleazar and R. Simeon every single sprinkling is a commandment by itself. In all there are 7+1 sprinklings of bull’s blood and the same number of he-goat’s blood in the Holiest of Holies, the same number of both kinds of blood on the gobelins, 4 of the combined blood on the horns of the golden altar and 7 on its top, for a total of 4x8+11 = 43.. Therefore the rabbis say, any seven²⁴⁰This really should read “eight”. are atonement by themselves. [Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon are saying, each single one is atonement by itself.]²⁴¹Corrector’s addition. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Eleazar²⁴²The Amora ben Pedat, not the Tanna, ben Arakh, quoted in the Tosephta., the reason of Rebbi Eleazar and²⁴³Reading וְ instead of the similar sounding בֵי. Rebbi Simeon: he finished atoning for the holy²⁴⁴Lev. 16:20., even if there is only one giving, the Torah says “he finished”²⁴⁵Since emphasis is on finishing, even if only a single sprinkling is needed to complete the ceremony it is counted and valid..

¹⁹²From here to the end of the Halakhah, the text is not only in Ševuot but also inSanhedrin 10:1, Notes 23–37, 14–22 (and in the Babli Yoma 86b). For part of the text there exists a Geniza fragment (G) edited by L. Ginzberg in his Yerushalmi Fragments (1909) p. 267. Rebbi Matthew ben Ḥarash asked Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah in the Academy¹⁹³He asks for an answer on the record.. He said to him, did you hear the four types of Atonement which Rebbi Ismael explained? He answered him, there are three in addition to repentance. One verse says, return, naughty children¹⁹⁴Jer. 3:22.. But another verse says, for on that day He shall atone for you¹⁹⁵Lev. 16:20.. And another verse says, I shall visit their crime with the rod¹⁹⁶Ps. 89:33, etc. And another verse says, the iniquity of this people shall not be atoned for until you die¹⁹⁷Is. 22:14.. How is this? If somebody violates a positive commandment and repents, before he moves from there it will be forgiven to him. About this one it says, return, naughty children. If one transgresses a prohibition and immediately repents, repentance suspends judgment, and the Day of Atonement atones. About this one it says, for on that day, He shall atone for you. If one intentionally transgressed {sins punishable by} extirpations or death penalties, repentance and the Day of Atonement atone half, and sufferings during the other days of the year atone half. About this one it says, I shall visit their crime with the rod, and their iniquities with plagues. But by whom the Name of Heaven was desecrated, there is no power in repentance to suspend judgment, nor in the Day of Atonement to pardon, nor in sufferings to scour; but repentance and the Day of Atonement atone one third, sufferings atone a third, and death scours with sufferings. About this one it says, the iniquity of this people shall not be atoned for until you die. From this we learn that death scours.

¹⁶⁹Babli 36b, Sifra Aḥare Parashah2(4–6), the entire paragraph. The starting sentence was added by the corrector, probably from one of the parallel sources.[It was stated: “How does he confess? “I acted criminally, I rebelled, I sinned;’ and it says¹⁷⁰Ex. 34:7., He forgives crime, rebellion, and sin; and it says¹⁷¹Lev. 16:21., and he shall confess over it all crimes of the Children of Israel, etc., the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, criminal acts are intentional crimes, offenses are rebellions¹⁷²Sins intentionally committed as rebellion against God., sins are inadvertent actions¹⁷³Ševuot 1:3 (Note 114), Babli Ševuot12b, Keritut 25b.. After he confesses about criminal acts he turns around and confesses about inadvertent acts? But he confesses as follows: Please Hashem, I sinned, I acted criminally, I rebelled before You, I and my house (etc..) [and the sons of Aaron. As is written in the Torah of Moses as follows, for on that day he shall, etc. They, answer him: “Praised be the glory of His Kingdom forever and ever”.]¹⁷⁴The text in parentheses is the scribe’s, the one in brackets the corrector’s, probably added from one of the parallel sources. And so we find that confessors do confess. David said¹⁷⁵Ps. 106:6. The vaw added to the last word is from the synagogue service of the Day., we and our fathers sinned, we acted criminally and we led to bad behavior. His son Solomon said¹⁷⁶IK. 8:47., [we sinned,] we acted criminally, behaved badly. Daniel said¹⁷⁷Dan.9:5., we sinned, we actedcriminally, we led to bad behavior, and we rebelled. Also he was confessing thus: I sinned, I acted criminally, I rebelled before You. What means this which Moses said, He forgives crime, rebellion, and sin; and it says, and he shall confess over it all crimes of the Children of Israel, etc.¹⁷⁸How can one explain the illogical order?? But since he confesses to criminal rebellious acts, it is as if they were inadvertent sins before Him.”

Rebbi Joḥanan asked: If one of the public died, can it be brought in his stead¹⁷⁹This is a question for RR. Jehudah and Simeon. If a person dedicated an animal as a purification offering but died before it was sacrificed, the animal cannot be sacrificed without its owner nor can it be redeemed or used for any profane or holy purpose whatsoever. If the bull really is the obligation of the public and paid by the public’s money, it should become unusable if anybody who gave money for the sacrifice (Note 172) died before the ceremony was held. Practically, this would make the ceremony impossible.? They answered, is it not written, those who came from captivity¹⁸⁰Ezra 8:35: Those who came from captivity, from the diaspora, sacrificed elevation offerings to the God of Israel, twelve bulls for all of Israel, 96 goats, 77 sheep, purification goats twelve, all of it an elevation offering for the Eternal. An elevation offering is completely burned; the meat of a purification offering is eaten by the priests. To call a purification offering an elevation offering is a contradiction in terms.? Is a purification offering an elevation offering? But just as an elevation offering is not eaten, this purification offering was not eaten¹⁸¹Babli 6a. Since they brought 12 goats, R. Jehudah has Ezra’s authority for his position. This interpretation justifies the reading of Num. 15:24 by the Mishnah. That verse requires the congregation to bring a bull as elevation offering and a goat as purification offering. If a purification offering which may not be eaten can be called an elevation offering, it is possible to identify this bull with the one prescribed in Lev.4:13. V. 24 requires the congregation (i. e., its Elders) to proffer the sacrifices but v. 25 requires the Cohen to conduct the entire ceremony. Both the opinions that the Elders do the laying on of their hands as also that the Cohen has to do it have biblical support.. Rebbi Jehudah says, they brought it for idolatry; Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, it was a temporary ruling¹⁷⁸A temporary deviation from Torah norms acceptable by prophetic instruction as long as it does not violate prohibitions. The absence of a bull and the presence of multiple goats both deviate from Torah prescriptions.. Rebbi Jeremiah (learned) [did not say]¹⁶³The text in the Babli shows that one has to read למר i. e. לֹא אָמַר. so but the bull needs laying on of hands by the Elders while the goats of idolatry do not need laying on of hands by the Elders. By whom? Rebbi Jeremiah wanted to say, by Aaron and his sons. Rebbi Yose told him, Rebbi Ḥiyya also stated, he shall put his hands on, they shall put their hands on¹⁸²Lev. 16:21 prescribes that Aaron has to lay his hand on the live goat. Since the entire service of the Day of Atonement is by the unaided High Priest, the mention of the name seems to be superfluous; it could as well have said “he has to lay his hands on.” It is concluded (next Note) that this is the only case in which the High Priest is required to lay his hands on. In parallel, one may read Lev. 4:15 where the Elders of the congregation are required to lay their hands on the bull, that they are not required to lay their hands on the goat., to include the goats of idolatry for laying on hands but not by the Elders. Rebbi Yose (learned) [did not say]¹⁶³The text in the Babli shows that one has to read למר i. e. לֹא אָמַר. so but the living [goat] needs laying on of hands by Aaron, but the goats of idolatry do not need laying on of hands by Aaron. It is written so, “Aaron shall lean with both his hands on the living goat’s head; the living [goat] needs laying on of hands by Aaron, but he goats of idolatry do not need laying on of hands by Aaron.¹⁸³Sifra Ahare Mot Parašah 4(4).” What does Rebbi Jeremiah do with this? He explains it, for a common priest¹⁸⁴Since neither the High Priest nor the Elders are empowered but Num. 15:25 requires the participation of a common priest, all biblical requirements are satisfied by having the common priest do the entire ceremony..

HALAKHAH: “One calls in the second [witness],” etc. ¹⁵⁰There are two parallels to this text. The one in Ševuˋot 4:1 is almost identical with the present text; the one in Yoma 6:1 is slightly rewritten (or changed in transmission.) The Ševuˋot text seems to be the original of most of the Halakhah.
As explained in the author’s Logical problems in Jewish tradition (in: Confrontations with Judaism, ed. Ph. Longworth, London 1966, pp. 171–196, mainly p. 174), talmudic interpretation of pentateuchal verses operates on a principle of definiteness: The language always is definite. Since the sequence of integers has a smallest but no largest element, an indefinite plural means “two”. Therefore, the explicit mention of “two” always implies some special meaning.Rams¹⁵¹Lev. 16:5,7,8 speaking of the rams used in the service of the Day of Atonement., the minimum of rams are two. Why does the verse say two? That both be equal¹⁵²Babli Yoma 62b, Sifra Ahare Parašah 2(1)..

HALAKHAH: “One calls in the second [witness],” etc. ¹⁵⁰There are two parallels to this text. The one in Ševuˋot 4:1 is almost identical with the present text; the one in Yoma 6:1 is slightly rewritten (or changed in transmission.) The Ševuˋot text seems to be the original of most of the Halakhah.
As explained in the author’s Logical problems in Jewish tradition (in: Confrontations with Judaism, ed. Ph. Longworth, London 1966, pp. 171–196, mainly p. 174), talmudic interpretation of pentateuchal verses operates on a principle of definiteness: The language always is definite. Since the sequence of integers has a smallest but no largest element, an indefinite plural means “two”. Therefore, the explicit mention of “two” always implies some special meaning.Rams¹⁵¹Lev. 16:5,7,8 speaking of the rams used in the service of the Day of Atonement., the minimum of rams are two. Why does the verse say two? That both be equal¹⁵²Babli Yoma 62b, Sifra Ahare Parašah 2(1)..

The priest shall atone who was anointed⁴⁵⁸Lev. 16:32. The problem is the legitimacy of a priest appointed ad hoc as High Priest to conduct the service of the Day of Atonement for which common priests are disqualified.. Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where to include another priest⁴⁵⁹The first 30 verses of the Chapter mention Aaron exclusively.? The verse says, who was anointed; not only the anointed with the anointing oil; from where the one clothed in multiple garb? The verse says, who was inducted into office. And from where another who was appointed⁴⁶⁰In an emergency of the Day of Atonement where no formal session of a court can be held. Even when anointing oil was available, simple investiture was enough.? The verse says, the priest shall atone⁴⁶¹Since it does not stress “the High Priest”, it follows that any priest can be appointed to fill the office.. How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth⁴⁶²It does not need the laying on of hands nor a document of appointment. (Tosaphot Yoma 12b s, v. כהן).. Rebbi Ze`ira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court.⁴⁶³Mishnah Idiut 5:6. The oral promise was irrevocable.”

Rabbi Matya ben Heresh went to Rabbi Yishmael ben Elazar HaKappar in Ludkia in order to learn about the four categories of atonement. He said to him: Have you heard about the four categories of atonement that Rabbi Yishmael used to teach? He replied: I have heard of three, and that repentance is essential for each one. One verse says (Jeremiah 3:22), “Return, you wayward children, says the Eternal, and I will heal your afflictions.” And another verse says (Leviticus 16:30), “On that day, he will atone for you, to purify you.” And another verse says (Psalms 89:33), “I will attend to their transgressions with my staff, and to their sins with plagues.” And another verse says (Isaiah 22:14), “This sin will not be forgiven until you die.” How do we make sense of all these? If a person transgresses a positive commandment and then repents, he is forgiven immediately. This is what is meant by “Return, you wayward children.” If a person transgresses a negative commandment and repents, the repentance is held over until Yom Kippur atones for him, as it says, “On that day, he will atone for you.” If a person transgresses a commandment for which he incurs spiritual excommunication [karet] or death by the court, and then repents, the repentance and Yom Kippur are held over until he is cleansed through suffering. This is what is meant by “I will attend to their transgressions with my staff.” But someone who profanes the heavenly Name has no possibility of repenting and waiting for forgiveness. Suffering will not cleanse him. Yom Kippur will not atone for him. They are all held over until death comes and cleanses him. This is what is meant by “This sin will not be forgiven until you die.”

Ten words in the Torah are marked with dots. They are as follows: 1. “The Eternal will judge between me and you” (Genesis 16:5). There is a dot above the letter yod in the term, “and you.” This teaches that Sarah did not say this to Abraham, but to Hagar. Some say that it means she was speaking about those who caused the fighting “between me and you.” 2. “They said to him, Where is Sarah?” (Genesis 18:9). There are dots above the letters aleph, yod, and vav in the term, “to him,” to indicate that they already knew where she was, but they nevertheless inquired about her. 3. (There is a dot on the verse,) “When she lay down and when she arose” (Genesis 19:33). There is a dot above the letter vav in the term, “When she arose” the first time it is used [with regard to Lot’s older daughter]. This teaches that he was not aware of what happened until the (younger daughter) arose. 4. “And Esau ran to greet him, and he hugged him, fell on his neck, and kissed him” (Genesis 33:4). The term for, “and kissed him,” has dots above every letter, to teach that he did not kiss him sincerely. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar would say: It means that this kiss was sincere, but every other one he gave Jacob was not. 5. “His brothers went to shepherd their father’s flocks in Shechem” (Genesis 37:12). There are dots on the word just before “flocks.” This teaches that they did not actually go to shepherd the flocks, but to eat and drink (and indulge their temptations). 6. “All the Levites who were recorded, whom Moses and Aaron recorded” (Numbers 3:39). There are dots above Aaron’s name. Why? To teach that Aaron himself was not counted in this record. 7. “On a long journey” (Numbers 9:10). There is a dot above the letter hei in the word “long.” This teaches that this does not really mean a long journey, but any exiting the boundaries of the outer court of the Temple. 8. “We caused destruction all the way up to Nophach, which reaches into Medeba” (Numbers 21:30). There is a dot above the letter reish in the word “which.” Why? To teach that they destroyed the idolaters but not the countries themselves (whereas the practice of idolaters was to destroy entire countries). 9. “A tenth, a tenth for each” (Numbers 29:15). [This verse delineates the meal offering that accompanies the burnt offering] on the first day of the Sukkot festival. There is a dot above the letter vav in the [first occurrence of the] word “tenth.” Why? To teach that there is only one-tenth [measure] for each. 10. “The hidden things are for the Eternal our God, and the revealed things are for us and our children forever” (Deuteronomy 29:30). There are dots above the words “for us and our children,” and above the letter ayin in the word “forever.” Why? For this is what Ezra said: If Elijah comes and says to me: Why did you write it this way? I will say to him: I have already put dots above these words [to indicate I was not certain it was correct]. But if he says to me: You wrote it correctly, then I will remove the dots.
There are eleven instances in the Torah where the Hebrew word for “she,” היא, is written as הוא (which means “he” or “it”) but vocalized to mean “she.” The first is: “The King of Bela, he is [i.e., “she is”] Tzur” (Genesis 14:1). The second: “He himself said to me, ‘She is my sister,’ and SHE also said, ‘He is my brother’” (Genesis 20:5). The third: “As she was being brought out, SHE sent a message to her father-in-law, saying” (Genesis 38:25). The fourth: “If one of your animals of which it is [i.e., “she is”] used for food dies” (Leviticus 11:39). The fifth: “And it [i.e., “and she”] has turned the hair white” (Leviticus 13:10). The sixth: “If the priest sees it…and it [i.e., “and she”] has faded” (Leviticus 13:21). [The seventh: “It (i.e., “she”) shall be a Sabbath of complete rest for you” (Leviticus 16:31). The eighth: “And SHE sees his nakedness” (Leviticus 20:17). The ninth: “SHE has disgraced her father” (Leviticus 21:9). The tenth: “And SHE has kept secret, and defiled herself (and she was not caught)” (Numbers 5:13). The eleventh: “A spirit of jealousy has passed over him, and he is jealous of his wife…but SHE has not defiled herself” (Numbers 5:14).