ייִדישער מחשבֿה אויף ויקרא 17:7

In order to prevent the chance of someone offering a sacrifice to other deities, the Torah demands that the locale for all sacrifices that are either voluntary or mandatory be the central house of worship, the holy Temple or tabernacle prior to the permanent Temple. Also, such sacrifice must be performed by the priest, who will sprinkle the blood and burn the fat on the altar provided for that purpose. This is an "eternal statute for all your generations." (Leviticus 17,7) Even the slaughtering of the sacrificial animal outside the precincts of the Temple compound is an offence carrying the karet, penalty, (premature death at the hands of G'd) The burning of any of the remains of the animals in a place not designated for that purpose is eaually prohibited, (ibid verse 19) (1) So much for the spiritual aspect of the matter. (2) Then the Torah addresses itself to the physical aspects of the sacrifices, namely the eating of the blood of the animals that had been offered as sacrifices. Since blood represents the personality of the creature, its consumption would superimpose the animalistic personality on the person who consumes it. The result would be that that man who is always a blend of spiritual and material forces would become predominantly materialistic. His spiritual forces would lose the chance of gaining the ascendancy within him. The result would be the destruction of his personality, i.e. karet extinction. As long as Israel had been in the desert, all blood of animals to be eaten, had to be poured out on the altar as if to dedicate the animal's personality to G'd. Man must dedicate himself, -in this case his sacrifice, seeing it is his alter ego-, to the Lord. "Love the Lord your G'd with all your soul, personality." Many heroes of the Bible describe their endeavours in those terms. When David prepares for battle against Goliath, he voluntarily risks his life for the sanctification of G'ds name. Jonathan tells his father about David that "he has put his soul, his personality in his hand" in order to kill the Philistine. (Samuel I, 19,4) Yiftach expressed himself in similar terms before going into battle against the Bney Ammon. (Judges 11,30) When a person takes risks like the ones described, for a cause other than the glorification of the name of G'd, such as for the sake of personal glory and honour, he is merely making himself guilty of suicidal conduct. David refused to drink the water that had been obtained for him by three brave soldiers at the risk of their lives. (Samuel 11,23,14-17) (3) Instead, David tried to obtain atonement for the men who had mistakenly risked their nefesh, soul, life for such mundane matters, by making a drink offering to G'd of these waters. David would have considered drinking this water as not much less sinful than drinking blood. Since nefesh belongs to G'd, a Jew must not consume it. Since nefesh resides in the blood, blood must not be eaten. (5) On the one hand, blood as the carrier of nefesh, is like a vessel containing vital fluid. If the container leaks, the fluid will be lost. On the other hand, it is the fluid which enables everything to feed upon it. The body is diffused with it, nourished and sustained by it. They are inextricably interwoven, and the description by the Torah once as if blood is the primary agent, and on the other occasion as if nefesh is the prime factor, is quite apt. (4) This function of blood is also the reason that blood of animals that are not suitable for sacrifice is prohibited. Absorption of the animalistic life essence of the animal by man's body, would result in man himself becoming more animalistic, predominantly so. When G'd said to Cain "the voice of your brother's blood cries out to Me," (Genesis 4,10) He refers to the fact that the nefesh is in that blood. (6) In the case of the birds and free roaming animals, their blood being thinner, the contribution it makes to the essence of their being is somewhat smaller. Therefore, when the Torah states "for the life of the flesh is in the blood,” this is a one sided description. In that instance, the Torah does not describe the blood as being simultaneously the vessel of the animal's personality. Nevertheless, such blood is also forbidden, seeing that the blood as an agent of the life sustaining soul, carries this sustenance to all parts of the body. Without it, the animal would die.

(1) The first message from G'd to Moses was to tell him, that although on occasion, death can be due to the concept of bi-krovay ekadesh, that death need not occur due to a mortal sin, there had been mortal sin in the case of the death of the sons of Aaron. The cause had been the sin as spelled out in the Torah at this point. The second communication by G'd to Moses, though related to him at a later stage, is coupled here with the former, in order to make the point that access to the holy of holies is restricted even to the High Priest, and that G'ds Presence does not appear in public, only wrapped in a cloud. (2) Even amongst the good people, the physical usually outweighs the spiritual. The High Priest who personifies the most favourable mix of the physical and the spiritual, is nonetheless mostly matter. His sin offering is described already in Leviticus 4,4, and consisted of a bull. Most of this bull was burned outside Jerusalem, only a small part being offered on the altar, (verse 12 there) The ram, symbolising man's spiritual part, which becomes olah, a total offering, i.e. fit for consumption by the altar in its entirety, is the other half of the High Priest's offering. Since the majority of the people are guilty of very fundamental errors, due to their yetzer hara, evil urge, the he-goat for the azzazel does not qualify for being offered on the altar itself. The fact that even the he-goat was presented in front of the tabernacle first, alive, is to show that even the kind of person represented by this he-goat will be granted forgiveness on the Day of Atonement. This is a tribute to the fact that a good part of their erroneous conduct had been due to the nature of the human condition, i.e. their being physical beings, something over which they had not had any control initially. The lots to be drawn symbolise the very fact that no choice existed prior to one's having being born into this world. (3) Use of the device of drawing lots to determine anything at all, appears to be an outright denial of G'ds Providence, since the result that emerges after the drawing of lots will be viewed as coincidence. The fact is however, that the cumulative effect of the lot falling again and again on the same person, lends it significance. If until the time of Shimon the Just, the lot "for the Lord" was always drawn by the he-goat placed on the right, that surely tells us something about the meaning of the word "right." (the time frame under discussion is about fifteen hundred years!) Indeed, once that pattern had been broken, due to the fact that the Jewish people could not produce a High Priest who was a tzaddik, and whose merits would counterbalance the sins of the masses, the lot would have become meaningless even if it had fallen on the he-goat that had been placed on the right. When Pharaoh had dreamed the same dream twice, that fact told Joseph something about whether the dream had any significance, or whether it was merely a matter of coincidence. The very repetition enabled Joseph to draw some conclusions. This is even more so, when the repetition occurs more than once. This is the reason the sailors "threw lots" (plural) and not just one "lot" before they were satisfied that the storm that threatened to sink their ship was really on account of Jonah. (Jonah 1,7) Since the lot fell on Jonah each time they repeated the procedure, they were certain that they were not condemning an innocent person on the basis of a "chance" lot. There is an element of chance concerning which person turns into a sinner, since natural endowments have a great deal to do with the likelihood of someone being able to overcome such strikes against him as he has been born with. Hence, if the he-goat for the azzazel becomes the scapegoat by means of the lottery, we might all breathe a sigh of relief and say "here but for the grace of G'd, go I." For that reason, the halachah, Jewish law, requires that the two he-goats must look so totally alike, that they are indistinguishable from one another. When the Tanna Ben Heh Heh says that reward is in accordance with the pain and effort incurred in securing an objective, (Avot 5,23), that he who has to overcome strong natural impediments rates a special reward, he does not mean that lack of this special effort totally forfeits one's chance of rehabilitation. The "scapegoat," though unfit to be presented on the altar, does accomplish this rehabilitation even for persons who have not made a special effort to surmount handicaps they were born with. (4) The procedure of offering incense, required a special skill, and therefore the full concentration of the High Priest during its performance. The reason for this could have been the need to counter the natural tendency to get "a glimpse" of the shechinah, Divine Presence. After all, the Torah did say "for in the cloud, I will become visible on the lid of the holy ark." (Leviticus 16,2) The Talmud tells of a High Priest, who was a member of the sect of the Sadducees, who when performing the rites of incense, put same on the pan prior to entering into the holy of holies, (contrary to hatachah ) and who boasted about having seen the shechinah. He died shortly after coming out of the sanctuary .The Pharisees saw in this a punishment for his disobedience. The Saducees felt that it was bad manners to enter the holy of holies without having everything ready, whereas the interpretation of the Pharisees of the verse "for through having made the cloud, My Presence over the lid can become revealed" was that they considered the exact composition of the correct quantities and ingredients of the incense as being vital. Placing of the incense on the pan, however, is to take place only "in front of G'd," as per verse 13. The sprinkling of the blood inside the holy of holies was to atone for errors concerning the laws applying to the temple itself, whereas the placing of the hands on the he-goat was to atone for other sins. The fact that the he-goat was used, also demonstrated that it was not a deity, (as some nations believed) This is the reason there had to be a special injunction "they shall no longer sacrifice to the he-goats." (Leviticus 17,7) There was no better date to proclaim the unity of G'd symbolically, and the futility of worshipping anyone or anything else, than the Day of Atonement. This symbolic statement helped to obtain forgiveness for other sins also. Whoever would observe that the scapegoat was thrown from the rock, would realise that it had not been an object of worship. Even Satan, the perennial accuser before the throne of G'd, would have to admit that the Jewish people were quite unequivocal in their service to the Lord. This is the meaning of a statement in Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer that we should present a bribe to Satan on that day. The sacrifice of the original Passover lamb in Egypt, was a similar statement of unequivocal commitment to G'd Therefore, the "great Sabbath," the Sabbath preceding the Passover holiday is conceptually related to the day of Atonement. For that reason Yom Kippur is also called Shabbaton The order of the confession, which according to the view of Rabbi Meir mentions the unintentionally committed sins first, and the intentionally committed ones last, was quoted in that order by Moses after the sin of the golden calf, when he remonstrated with G'd. Since Israel, at that time, had already done penitence, Moses made the point that due to the repentance, intentional sins had already been reduced to the status of unintentional sins. However, the normal process as found in the Bible on many occasions, is to first confess the intentional sins, including the ones that represent acts of rebellion against G'ds authority.

Scripture tells us, according to the Version of Onkelos, that the Egyptians worshipped Aries, and therefore abstained from killing sheep, and held shepherds in contempt. Comp. “Behold we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians,” etc. (Exod. 8:26); “For every shepherd is an abomination to the Egyptians” (Gen. 46:34). Some sects among the Sabeans worshipped demons, and imagined that these assumed the form of goats, and called them therefore “goats” [se‘irim]. This worship was widespread. Comp. “And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto demons, after whom they have gone a whoring” (Lev. 17:7). For this reason those sects abstained from eating goats’ flesh. Most idolaters objected to killing cattle, holding this species of animals in great estimation. Therefore the people of Hodu [Indians] up to this day do not slaughter cattle even in those countries where other animals are slaughtered. In order to eradicate these false principles, the Law commands us to offer sacrifices only of these three kinds: “Ye shall bring your offering of the cattle [viz.], of the herd and of the flock” (Lev. 1:2). Thus the very act which is considered by the heathen as the greatest crime, is the means of approaching God, and obtaining His pardon for our sins. In this manner, evil principles, the diseases of the human soul, are cured by other principles which are diametrically opposite.