The Talmud Bavli, Masechet Yoma, has been dedicated in memory of Mazal bat Esther Baghdadi and Yosef ben Mazal Baghdadi by their family. May the spirit of God grant them rest in Gan Eden, Amen. Today’s page has been dedicated by Northfork Bank and its private banking department with Gabriel Safdie. May God protect him and give him life. We would like to thank Northfork Bank and urge our listeners to patronize this generous financial institution. On a private note, we'd like to thank Mr. Gabriel Safdie for his continued support for all our programs here at Daf Yomi Torah learning resources and the Torah center, may you be meritorious of mitzvot. Today’s page has been dedicated in memory of Yosef ben Mazal and Shlomo Refael ben Mazal. May the spirit of God grant them rest in Gan Eden, Amen. Gemara Yoma, page 67. Today’s page is being studied for the elevation of the soul of Avraham ben Esther, may the spirit of God grant him rest in Gan Eden, Amen. Today’s page is being studied for the success of the soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces who stand guard over our land and the cities of our God, from the border of Lebanon to the setting sun and to the border of Egypt, on land, in air, and at sea, so that with God’s help our enemies should fall and our nation, especially the residents of the Land of Israel, should be protected by the Guardian of Israel. Guardian of the remnant of Israel, and may Israel not be lost, as it is said, "Behold, He neither slumbers nor sleeps, the Guardian of Israel." And a redeemer will come to Zion, Amen and Amen.
We begin today’s page on 66b, two lines from the bottom, starting from the Mishnah. The Mishnah begins: "From the respected people of Jerusalem," Rashi says, "from the important people of Jerusalem," "they would escort him." They would escort the person who was bringing the goat from the Temple courtyard of the Beit Ha-Mikdash all the way to Azazel. How would they escort him? It says: "until the first hut." We will learn now in our Mishnah that there was a dispute regarding how many huts were set up along the way from Jerusalem all the way until the mountain where the goat for Azazel was thrown off. We will learn that the people of Jerusalem would spend Yom Kippur in those huts, and when the appointed man would get to a hut, they would escort him from hut to hut. Each hut was distanced according to the laws of Shabbat boundaries. We know that a person cannot walk more than 2,000 cubits on Shabbat out of his boundary. So therefore, we will learn exactly the number of huts, the distance between the huts, and exactly how they were allowed to walk and until which point they escorted him to the mountain.
The first opinion of our Mishnah says: "They would escort him until the first hut." Rashi, bottom line, "until the first hut, they made huts for him on the way, and people would go to dwell there before Yom Kippur, who would escort him from hut to hut." So the Mishnah says: "There were ten huts from Jerusalem until the cliff." There were actually ten huts from Jerusalem until the cliff, which would be the cliff or the mountain that they would throw off the goat. The Mishnah gives us the distance of these huts: "ninety ris." Now, before we get to what ninety ris is, the Mishnah tells us: "seven and a half ris per mil." Ris is a measure, it's a distance. So seven and a half into ninety, you'll have twelve mil. Now we know that the measure of twelve mil is significant because that was the measure of the distance of the camp of Israel when the Jewish people were traveling in the desert. If you'd measure from the beginning of the camp all the way to the end of the camp, it was the measure of twelve mil. So the Mishnah says that the measure from Jerusalem all the way until the mountain was altogether a measure of twelve mil. "Ninety ris," Rashi says: "were from Jerusalem until the cliff." Okay, now what is the cliff? "A tall mountain," cliff is a tall mountain, "and it's steep," "as we say in Bava Metzia, 'on a steep mound' and it fell." Obviously, we're going to learn that it was a steep mountain because they want the animal to die. They don't want to make it a slope mountain where it won't roll down as fast, so that's why they call it a cliff.
Now, next Rashi: "Seven and a half ris per mil." "So for ninety ris, it is twelve mil." "And they are," now Rashi explains to us: "eleven stations." Altogether, it's eleven stations. "From Jerusalem to the first hut, one station." The first station was from Jerusalem, from the Temple courtyard until the first hut. "And from hut to hut until ten huts," and then you have ten huts, so you're going from hut to hut, so that is nine stations, that's another nine stations. "So that is ten stations." So that already takes us to ten stations. So therefore, altogether we have ten mil. Okay? So we're short so far two. At the last hut, we're short two mil. "And from the last hut to the cliff, one station." That's another station. "So each station was one mil." Each station there was a mil. A mil, incidentally, is 2,000 cubits, which is exactly the Shabbat boundary. "Except for one of them," which is the last station, "which had two mil." So now it's going to come out that at the last hut, the tenth hut, they were only able to escort him 2,000 cubits, then they had to stop. So they were only witnessing the goat getting thrown off of Azazel from far. Whereas the appointed man himself, he was able to go all the way to the mountain. We're not concerned about his issues of boundaries because as we learned on yesterday's page that from the verse "appointed man" we learned "even on Shabbat." For example, even if he needed to carry the animal on his shoulder, it would be permissible because clearly the Torah tells us that the laws of Shabbat or the laws of Yom Kippur, let's say, do not apply to the appointed man.
Let's continue Rashi: "That is what the Mishnah means, 'and they would escort him from hut to hut,' because a mil is a Shabbat boundary." That's why the people that were escorting could go from hut to hut because they'd get there 2,000 cubits. "Except for the last one," except for the last people in the last hut, "which is two mil away." "And he would escort him one mil," they were able to go a mil, which is 2,000 cubits, "and stand from afar," and they would have to stand from far, "and see his actions." Okay? And they would be able to see his things from far. Now the end of Rashi over here, he's quoting a poem from Rabbi Elazar HaKalir who wrote different liturgical poems, and he's just trying to work in the poem of Rabbi Elazar HaKalir with the numbers that we're giving over here. We're not familiar with these poems, we don't have them in our books, but that's what Rashi is doing there. Now regarding the word ris, there are different opinions. Some call it a rus (resh vav samech) and the resh vav samech would come out to resh is 200, vav is 6, so it'd be 266. So each rus is 266 steps, paces, according to the calculation of rus. So therefore he says over here, I'm quoting the Rav, "it turns out that seven and a half ris is 2,000 paces minus five." "It's close enough to the measure of Shabbat boundary." That's why they call those items a rus. That's what "seven and a half ris per mil" means. It's basically 2,000 cubits per seven and a half ris. In any event, the Mishnah continues: "At every hut," at every station, at every hut, "they would say to him, 'Here is food and here is water.'" There's water over here for you and there's sustenance, there's food for you over here. Now the Gemara is going to discuss over here. That really he was allowed to eat, the appointed man, even though it’s Yom Kippur, because he gets weak, I mean you’re making the guy walk now into the desert. So they would offer him water but the Gemara’s going to say not that he ever ate, but there’s a principle called "bread in his basket" that a person when he knows it’s available to him, so then already he’s satiated. You know when he knows there’s no food around, so then already he gets more hungry than he is. So that was the logic of why they would say, "Don’t worry, there’s food over here for you if you want to eat something." "And here is water, and they would escort him from hut to hut except for the last of them," they would escort him from hut to hut except from the last hut, "because he does not reach the cliff with him," because it was two mil, so they cannot walk more than one mil, "but stands from afar and sees his actions." So they would stand from far and they would see his actions, what he was doing. "What would he do?" "He would split a strip of crimson wool." He would take a piece of red string and he would split it. "Half of it he would tie to the rock." Half of it he would place on the rock that was next to the mountain, "and half of it he would tie between its two horns." And the other half he would place between the horns of the goat that is sent away. "And he would push it from behind." He would then push the animal from behind, "and it would roll." And it would roll, "and descend." And obviously it would descend the mountain. "And it would not reach halfway down the mountain until it was in pieces." It would not make it to half the mountain until it was just a pile of bones. "He would come and sit under the last hut until it got dark." Now he would walk back to the last hut. Now the question is, well once he does the mitzvah of sending the goat for Azazel, throwing it off the mountain now, so ostensibly he's subject to the laws of boundaries. And we know the law once a person walks out of his boundary, he really can't travel. So now how are we letting him walk back all the way to the 4,000 cubits back to the last hut? So Rashi says, "He would come and sit," "he returns to the last hut, even though he goes beyond the boundary, even with permission." And even though a person that leaves his boundary even if he has permission like in this case, "it is only 2,000 cubits from the place from which he left." He only has 2,000 cubits and here we're letting him walk back to the hut. "With permission for this and with permission for that, they permitted it because he is afflicted and weak." Here the guy's weak, he's tired, you've got to let him go back to at least the shady area to have some protection. "And furthermore, he is afraid to stand alone in the desert when it gets dark." You have to remember he's in the desert, he's in the desert. He's scared to stand there alone. Now it's going to get dark. So therefore they made a dispensation for him, they let him walk back to the final, to the last of the huts.
Just some insights before we go further in this Mishnah. First we read over here it says "and he would push it from behind," right they would push him from behind, "and it would roll" and he rolls down the mountain and he doesn't get to half the mountain until he becomes bones. So it says in the Zohar HaKadosh it is written, that's the Zohar in Parashat Acharei Mot, "that he would push the goat with both his hands." He would push it with two hands. "And after it was in pieces, he would send a saying," "so too may the sins of your people, the House of Israel, be wiped away." And if you remember in our prayer books in the order that's called "You established," which is the order of the Temple service, we do say that after he pushed it he would say "so too may the sins be wiped away." Now there's a dispute how to interpret those words. We say so too our sins of Israel should become obliterated. So he says, "Some say it is a prayer." Some say it's a prayer, like the Holy One, Blessed be He, "just as the goat falls and becomes pieces and nothing remains of its substance and benefit." There's nothing left of the at least purposeful of the animal, "so too You, King of Kings, should cause our sins to fall and be lost from Your books and they should have no resurrection." Our sins should be obliterated and totally destroyed and there'll be no value to them. "And some say that this comes to say that Israel abandoned the evil inclination and cast it away from them like this goat that is sent away." Which means, "and therefore their sins will be wiped away." And some say it was more like a statement where the priest is saying that just like the Children of Israel, just like they threw the goat, just like the Children, just like they threw the goat off the mountain, so too the Children of Israel, so too, they have thrown the evil inclination so to speak away, so that we have no more use for the evil inclination and therefore automatically there's not going to be any more sins, and therefore we're okay. Now the Malbim writes, "that this was a miracle that the goat fell with its push." It was a miracle that the goat fell with the push. "Since a goat by its nature leaps on mountains and skips on hills." A mountain goat, that's what it does. It jumps on mountains and it's able to skip and, you know, to survive on that terrain. "And therefore it is explained in Targum Yonatan that a spirit from God came and sent the goat to its death." "And therefore it is not explicitly mentioned in the verse that he pushed it to the cliff, for it is not the way of the scripture to mention miraculous deeds." Wow. The verse really doesn't talk about that he throws him off the mountain because, according to the Malbim, the way I understand it, that's an open miracle. That a mountain goat that normally stays on the mountains, now all of a sudden he doesn't know how to stabilize himself. Yeah, so what? But that the animal has, it's like a squirrel in a tree. That's its terrain. So it knows if you push it, it's able to claw onto it. So he says that was a miracle in itself.
The Yerushalmi has a question that all this situation of taking it to Azazel, throwing it off the mountain, he says "that this was only until the days of Shimon HaTzaddik," which was forty years before the destruction. "But after Shimon HaTzaddik died, the goat would flee to the desert." Which means they had, they lost control of the goat. The goat would run away, right? And he says that the Yerushalmi even says that you had the robbers, there were thieves in the desert, and they would take it and they would eat it. So this is what happened. "And it is further explained in the Yerushalmi." So the Yerushalmi says, "that if the goat fled after he sent it to the top of the cliff," which means once you've brought it to the top of the mountain, let's say it runs away, "there is no longer a law of impurity of clothes regarding it." We're going to learn now that anybody that sent the, came in contact with it, it makes his clothes impure. So once you get it to the top of the mountain, that's it. That anybody that comes in contact with after that point, there is no law of impurity of clothes. Okay. Now we go to the next point. "He would come and sit in the last hut until it got dark." So we said the appointed man would go back to the last hut until it got dark. So the Tosafot Yeshanim writes over here, "that even according to the opinion that holds that boundaries are from the Torah." Which is even according to the opinion, which is Rabbi Akiva, we learned in Masechet Shabbat, he holds that even the 2,000 cubits is from the Torah. We hold that the 2,000 cubits is only Rabbinic. From the Torah, twelve mil is the entire distance. In any event, it says, "here there is no Torah prohibition in returning to the last hut," "since he did not rest on Erev Shabbat at the place of the cliff." Because on Erev Shabbat, he wasn't at the cliff, he wasn't at the cliff. "And the Torah prohibition of going beyond the boundary is only from the place where one established his resting place." "And since here it is only Rabbinic, the Sages did not make these concerns." Which means he's learning that the Torah prohibition is only to go more than 2,000 cubits from where you were establishing your resting place. Now here, he was establishing his resting place in the city, and there's no prohibition because we all measured off, you're allowed to go. So once he's at the cliff, even the opinion that says from the Torah, it's not to go back. It would be a Rabbinic prohibition. A Rabbinic prohibition, we're not, we're not concerned about. There's one, one question that the Rashash asks is why did they make it twelve mil away? So the Rashash wants to say that according to the view of the Rif that says the measure of Torah boundaries is indeed twelve mil, so they didn't want the appointed man to walk beyond the Torah boundary. So actually when we say twelve mil, it's twelve mil minus a little bit just in order that he doesn't have to transgress the Torah prohibition.
Now one, one last point over here before we go further in the Mishnah. We said that in every hut they would offer him water and provisions. So Rashi said in order that he'll have bread in his basket, so to speak, and therefore when he knows there's food available for him, so the fast goes easier for him. So he says over here, "and it implies that if, because of the walking, he needed to eat, it was not permitted to him for that reason." Which means it sounds like from Rashi that this was only a psychological tactic to make the fast go easier for him, but not that they would actually give him. However, he quotes the Rambam, and the Rambam says, "that if his strength failed," that if the man actually got weak, "and he needed to eat food." So therefore this was part of the dispensations that they would give the appointed man that he had a bigger dispensation regarding eating. And the Tosafot Yeshanim says just like we said that the sending is overriding Shabbat and just like the sending is overriding impurity, which we learned yesterday that even let him go into the Temple courtyard in impurity together, therefore the appointed man also overrides the fast even if he feels weak. And he says, "it is possible that even if he was not in mortal danger," even if he really wasn't in mortal danger, "it is permitted for him to eat," "if he needed it," "for it was permitted to cancel the affliction for the purpose of the sending." That's the way the commentators explain. In any event, we can go further in the Mishnah. We'll get to that eleventh. Comes the Mishnah continues: "And from when do clothes become impure?" At what point does the sending of the goat that is sent away make clothes impure? Rashi says, he quotes the verse, "And he who sends the goat shall wash his clothes." The one that's involved in sending the goat away, he has to clean his clothes, which means they become impure. So at what point do the clothes become impure? So one says, "from when he leaves outside the wall of Jerusalem." Once he gets outside the wall of Jerusalem, that's when the impurity of clothes kicks in. Rabbi Shimon says, "No, from the time he pushes it to the cliff." No, at the point where he pushes him off the mountain. And the Gemara is going to quote verses to substantiate both opinions.
Comes the Gemara and says: "Our Rabbis taught in a Baraita: There were ten huts and twelve mil." Altogether twelve mil, like we learned, one mil from Jerusalem to the first hut, then you have another nine mil between the ten huts, that's ten mil, and then two mil from the last hut until the mountain. "These are the words of Rabbi Meir." That means that the Mishnah is an anonymous Mishnah, which is an anonymous Mishnah of Rabbi Meir, like the author of this Baraita. Rabbi Yehuda says, Rabbi Yehuda says: "No, nine huts." There was actually only nine huts, "and ten mil." And altogether there was only a distance of ten mil. How do you have that? You have nine huts which is eight, eight mil between the nine huts, you have one mil from Jerusalem to the first hut that's nine, and you have another mil from the last hut until the until the cliff. Rashi no, continue. Rabbi Yosi says, Rabbi Yosi says: "Five huts." He says no, there were only five huts, "and ten mil," and altogether there was ten mil, "and all of them by means of an Eruv." And all of them were established using an Eruv. Now what does this mean? Rashi. "Five huts and ten mil." If there's five huts, so obviously there's more than 2,000 cubits between each hut. So therefore how did they escort the priest, or the appointed man I should say, from one hut to another hut? They're going more than 2,000 cubits. So the way they did that was they would establish an Eruv, meaning between the two huts you had let's say the members that were living in one hut on Yom Kippur, before Yom Kippur they would go and put provisions at the midway point, let's say. So now they have 2,000 cubits from where their Eruv is, not from where the hut is. So that enabled them to walk two mil. So therefore according to Rabbi Yosi, they were able to use the concept of Eruvin to walk more than the given 2,000 cubits. Rashi says, "five huts," five huts, "and ten mil," "and each one would escort him more than a mil," so each one would escort the appointed man more than a mil, "until the hut," or even until the next hut, "by means of an Eruv," according to an Eruv. So now the Gemara says oh, once you're introducing the usage of Eruvin, so now already you don't have to come on to five huts, you can even make it different configurations. How? Rabbi Yosi said, "My son Elazar conversed with me." Says my son Elazar conversed to me, which means the way Rashi says like he laughed. Why? "If by means of an Eruv..." He says, "Dad, once already you're introducing the usage of an Eruv over here, "it can be done with even two huts." All you need is two huts "and ten mil" and all together what it'll get you is a distance of ten mil. How? So look at Rashi. Rashi gives you exactly how to how to figure it out. "My son Elazar conversed with me," "in a laughing tone about my words," meaning as if he was laughing at what I said. "And he said to me, 'If by means of an Eruv, it is enough to make two huts.'" Already you can get them to the escorting to the mountain with two huts. How? "That the people of Jerusalem should escort him two mil." You collect the people of Jerusalem go two mil. How? Let them put an Eruv at the midway point from Jerusalem to the first hut. So that'll get them to the Eruv. From the Eruv they get to walk another mil. So right away you got already two mil from Jerusalem to the first hut. "And from the first hut, they went out to meet him two mil." And now what? From the first hut they're able to come greet him. They get to walk two mil which means "so there are four mil that you can distance the hut from Jerusalem." Which means like this, the first hut can actually be four mil away from Jerusalem. How? The guys from Jerusalem by placing an Eruv they get to walk two mil. The guys in that hut, they can now make an Eruv the other direction and they could walk two mil towards Jerusalem to meet the priest or the appointed man. Let's review again. You have Jerusalem, right? Now we want to escort the appointed man. So now let them before Yom Kippur set up an Eruv one mil away. Okay? So now they're walking with the appointed man, they get to the mil, that's 2,000 cubits. Well there's the Eruv. The Eruv gives them a second mil. Good. Now once they get to that second mil, these guys from Jerusalem are stuck. They cannot travel anymore. Good. Two mil away is the first hut. Now the guys from the first hut before Yom Kippur will make their Eruv towards Jerusalem one mil away. Not one mil from their hut. Now they can walk to that mil because that's where the Eruv is, and from that mil they get to walk another mil where they could pick up the appointed man and escort him to the first hut. So technically you're able to have a distance of four mil from Jerusalem to hut number one. Now let's continue the calculation. From the first hut to the second hut you could also have four mil. How? You say like this, some of the people, not all the people because those guys made their Eruv the other way, some of the people of that hut will make their Eruv towards Azazel before Shabbat, before Yom Kippur. So they put their Eruv one mil out. So they could continue walking obviously one mil and from there they could walk another mil. So that takes them to two, I have six. Now the second hut which is two mil away from that, part of those guys will make an Eruv towards Jerusalem, right? And therefore they're able to walk back one mil and walk another mil to meet the appointed man and then escort him to this hut. That gives you eight. And then in the last hut some of the members will put an Eruv towards Azazel one mil out. So that gives you already 2,000 cubits over there and they could actually walk all the way until the mountain itself and you don't have to have them looking from far. So that's what Elazar ben Yosei some were saying, listen once you've already got the usage of Eruvin you don't have to make all these huts over here. We get you two huts, that's four from Jerusalem to hut number one, from hut number one to number two is another four mil and you got two more left, you have no problem. So let's read that in Rashi now. I'll read that Rashi again. "In a laughing tone about my words, and he said to me, 'If by means of an Eruv, it is enough to make two huts, that the people of Jerusalem should escort him two mil, and from the first hut they went out to meet him,'" right, towards Jerusalem, "two mil, so there are four mil that you can distance the hut from Jerusalem, and the second hut at the end of four mil from the first, and some of the members of the first hut," some of the... some of the members of the first hut, "would make their Eruv towards the second," they’ll make their Eruv to the other side, "and some would make their Eruv towards Jerusalem," and some of them will make their Eruv towards Jerusalem. "And so too the members of the second hut," so too the members of the second hut, "some of them would make their Eruv towards the first," "to go out to meet him," right, some will make their Eruv towards Jerusalem, "two mil," "and some of them would make their Eruv towards the cliff," "to escort him," "two mil," and the others make it to the side of the cliff in order to walk an additional two mil. So comes the Gemara and says, Rabbi Yosi said, "Elazar ben Damya conversed with me, 'By means of an Eruv, I can establish two huts and ten mil.'" Okay, comes the Gemara and says, "According to whom does the following Baraita go?" "Except for the last of them, that he did not reach the cliff with him, but stands from afar and sees his actions." That who is that Baraita going like that from the last hut they weren’t able to reach the cliff? "According to Rabbi Meir." This has to be going like Rabbi Meir, because the way that Rabbi Meir understood it was what? That it was 2,000 cubits without the usage of Eruvin over here. There was 2,000 cubits between each hut, right? So by the time they got to the last hut, you had two mil more to get to the mountain. So you’re only able to walk 2,000 cubits, you got one mil left, and they would have to stand there and watch it from far, as he says, "According to Rabbi Meir," "for according to Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosi, even the last one reaches the cliff." Meaning, according to the other rabbis, it was ten mil. It was ten mil away, so therefore you put the Eruv there and you’re able to reach it. So that Baraita is going like Rabbi Meir as well as, of course, our Mishnah is following the opinion of Rabbi Meir. It continues, "At every hut, they would say to him, 'Here is food and here is water.'" At every hut they would offer him drink and food. "It was taught: Never did a person need it." The appointed man never came to the situation where he needed to take the food and the drink, "but one who has bread in his basket is not like one who does not have bread in his basket." You can’t compare to a person who literally has his bread in his basket when he knows it’s available to him so it makes the fast, like we said, go easy. And we just discussed the dispute of the early commentators if the appointed man really did have a dispensation to eat on Yom Kippur if he felt weak. According to the Rambam, it’s implied yes indeed he did. "What would he do?" "He would split a strip of crimson wool," so he’d take the strip of crimson wool, that was the red string, and he would split it in half. So comes the Gemara and says, this way or the length or the width? I don’t know, I don’t know what the measurement of the string was if it makes a difference if it’s length or width. But the point is, the Gemara says, "And let him tie it all to the rock." Why do you got to put half on the rock, half on the horn? Just take the whole red string, put it on the rock, and when you throw it off, you look at the rock and you see if it turns colors. So Gemara says, "Since it is a mitzvah concerning the goat," since there’s a mitzvah to throw the goat off the mountain, "perhaps it will turn white prematurely." We’re worried that maybe the string that’s on the rock, maybe it’s going to turn white prematurely, early. Which means the white string was not necessarily dependent on throwing off the goat off the mountain. It was possible that the white string, if the Children of Israel did deserve the proper atonement, it could turn white even before you throw it off the mountain. So what’s going to happen now? The appointed man is about to push it off the mountain, he looks back, he sees the white, the string turned white, "and his mind will be at ease," and he’s going to have peace of mind and he’s going to become preoccupied, he’s not going to end up throwing it off the mountain, and you’re going to lose out on this mitzvah. Look at Rashi. Rashi says, "Since it is a mitzvah concerning the goat," "to push it from behind," "as it is written, 'to a cut-off land,'" "something that is cut and descends," you have to send it to the land of cutting, a place that’s going to rip up the animal. "If you say to tie it all to the rock," if you’re going to tell him to put the whole thing on the rock, "sometimes it will turn white prematurely," "before the pushing of the goat," right, it might turn white before he pushes it off the mountain, "and his mind will be at ease, his heart will be happy over the sin of the transgressions," he’s going to be so happy that he sees that Children of Israel got atonement, "and he will not care to fulfill the mitzvah of the goat." He’s not going to be interested in throwing it off the mountain anymore. "Therefore, he ties half of it between its horns at the end." Now he’s got half of it on the horns of the animal, "and his eyes are fixed on it." Now he’s looking at the red string on the animal, "and since he is doing it," That's the last move that he's doing, so he's focused now on the animal. "He will not delay from pushing it." He's not going to delay for pushing it off. Why? "And it will not turn white in halves until the entire work is completed," because once you split the string, it's not going to turn white until you push it off the mountain, because now it's connected to the goat. So therefore, it was a technique that they ensured that the appointed man would not take his mind off the goat and forget about throwing off the mountain. Since it's already on the horns, so he said as a sign in the Temple courtyard. So the Gemara says, "And let him tie it all between its horns." So put the whole thing on the horns. What do you have to put it between? Tie it on the horns, throw it off the mountain, look down the mountain, and then they'll see it turn white. So "sometimes its head will be bent and he will not be aware of it." We're worried that sometimes the head of the animal will be, let's say, bent over or first, and therefore you're not going to be able to see the white string from his vantage. So therefore they split it just in order that they'll be able to know if it turned white or not. Rashi says in the bottom line, "Its head will be bent, its head will bend under its body," "when it falls backward," "and he will not be able to see the strip if it turned white." They're not going to be able to see the white string if it turned white.
Now we discuss the history of the red string. "Our Rabbis taught in a Baraita: Originally," originally, "they would tie a strip of crimson wool on the entrance of the Ulam from the outside." Originally, the red string was in the Beit Ha-Mikdash. They would go to the Ulam, on the outside of the Ulam, so everybody had a view of it. So what happened? "If it turned white, they would rejoice." If it turned white, everybody was thrilled, they were happy. "If it did not turn white, they would be sad." If it didn't turn white, they were depressed "and ashamed." And they also got embarrassed. "They instituted that they should tie it on the entrance of the Ulam from the inside." So the custom came that they would start putting it on the inside of the Ulam where less people are able to see. "And still they would peep and see." And they were still able to peep through and see exactly what was going on. "If it turned white, they would rejoice." "If it did not turn white, they would be sad." They were depressed. "They instituted that they should tie half of it to the rock and half of it between its horns." They said, you know what, take it out of view of everybody, just put it on the rock next to the goat for Azazel. Rav Nachum bar Papa said in the name of Rabbi Elazar HaKappar: "Originally, they would tie a strip of crimson wool on the entrance of the Ulam from the inside." He has a different history. He says, no, the first place they put it was on the inside, so they were cautious from the beginning, only put it on the inside. "And when the goat reached the desert, it would turn white, and they would know that its mitzvah was fulfilled." And once the goat would get to the desert, which even before it was thrown off the mountain, already the red string would turn white, "as it is said, 'If your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.'" If your sins are like red string, they will turn, become white like snow. Now, the Yerushalmi has an interesting custom over here about the red string. The Yerushalmi says, "Originally, each one would tie it on their windows." That everybody would tie a red string on their windows. "Some of them would turn white and some of them would remain red." And depending on who you were, some of the strings would turn white and some would stay red. "And they would be ashamed of each other." The neighbors would get embarrassed from each other. This guy's got a red string and his neighbor's got a white string. So therefore, "they returned and tied it at the entrance of the Heichal." So they moved it to the Beit Ha-Mikdash. Now, the issue over here is, so the people would see it turn white, they were happy. If it stayed red, they would get depressed. So what's the problem if they become upset? What were they concerned about? So he quotes over here from the Shoshanim L'David, "that it is not proper for them to be sad on Yom Kippur, because it is a holiday." And they don't want them to be depressed, this is a holiday, and therefore you're not supposed to be upset. "But after Yom Kippur, they would tell the people if the string had turned white or not, so that they would do repentance." But he says after Yom Kippur they would get the news if it turned red or not, or white or not, so they could make repentance. The Korban Ha'eda has a different interpretation. He says, "that they did not want to do so publicly." The reason why they didn't want to publicize the turning of the colors, "so that the matter would not be known to the nations of the world," so the gentiles don't find out about it, because if the gentiles would find out about it, it would become a desecration of God's name that God did not forgive us. Now the Aruch L'ner he uses both. If they're gonna be depressed by finding out that it didn't turn white, so he says, "that they would refrain from praying and doing repentance properly." It'll be hopeless for them and they won't make repentance. Just the whole purpose we want them to continue making repentance. Once they see it stays red, they'll say there's no hope for us. So therefore they didn't want them to become depressed because that might deter them from the mitzvah of the day which is making repentance. "Or that by being sad, their fortune would be bad." Or when a person is depressed, it can affect his fortune. And therefore they didn't want to affect the fortune of the Children of Israel on Yom Kippur by depressing them, so therefore they did not let them know exactly when it happened.
Okay, comes the Gemara and continues. "It was asked of them:" Now it says, "It would not reach halfway down the mountain." It wouldn't reach halfway the mountain and already it was bones. "It was asked of them," the Gemara has a question. "Those limbs," "what is their status regarding benefit?" Are they permitted for benefit or not? "Rav and Shmuel, this is a dispute." "One said they are permitted and one said they are forbidden." "The one who said they are permitted," "as it is written 'in the desert,'" because the verse refers that you have to, you know, push the Azazel, bring it in the desert. So Rashi says what does desert teach us? "And he shall send the goat into the desert." "And the verse is superfluous," it's an extra verse because we know it's in the desert. "To expound that it should be ownerless like the desert." That it's ownerless, it becomes ownerless like the desert. Just like anybody could benefit from the desert, so too you can benefit from the bones of the goat. "And the one who said they are forbidden," "as it is written 'a cut-off land.'" Right, it calls it "a cut-off land." Now what does "cut-off land" mean? Rashi says, "a term of strictness and prohibition." Right, strictness and it's forbidden. So the dispute is which word do you focus on? Do you focus on the word desert, permitted? You focus on the word "cut-off land," it's a decree, meaning it's forbidden. "And the one who said they are forbidden," the opinion that says it's forbidden, "what does he do with this word 'desert'?" "He needs it for what was taught in a Baraita." No, he has a different usage for it like it says in the Baraita. "To the desert, to the desert, in the desert." Three times in the portion of Azazel it says the word desert. "To include Nov, Givon, Shiloh, and the Eternal House." To come and tell me that the law of Azazel not only applied in the Beit Ha-Mikdash, but applies also when the Jewish people had the Tabernacle in Nov, in Givon and Shilo. Hence "to the desert," "desert," "desert" to include other situations. Good. Comes the Gemara and says, "And the other one, what does he do with this word 'cut-off land'?" Right, so the opinion that says it's permitted, what does he do with the word "cut-off land"? "He needs it for what was taught in a Baraita." Use it for the following novelty of the Baraita. "A cut-off land means nothing but a cut-off land." "Cut-off land" means something that is cut. So Rashi says, "a cut and steep cliff, not too sloping." It has to be a steep cliff that has the ability to cut. "Cut-off land" it's a reference to what type of cliff, the steepness of the cliff. "Another explanation: 'cut-off land' means nothing but something that is cut." That's referring to an item that rips or tears. "And descends." Rashi, "The goat is cut into pieces there." So one reference is "cut-off land" is referring to the mountain and one word the "cut-off land" is referring to the animal that it has to be a type of situation that it can be torn into many pieces. "Another explanation: 'cut-off land,'" the word, you know what the "cut-off land" teaches us? "Cut-off land" literally means a decree. "Lest you say it is a futile act." Maybe a guy's gonna come along and say what is this business here throwing a goat off a mountain, getting atonement, this is a futile act, meaning what type of atonement is this over here, how's this work? "The verse comes to say, 'I am the Lord.'" At the end of the portion. At the end of the portion of Azazel, it says "I am the Lord" to teach us what? "I am the Lord, I have decreed, and you have no right to question them." I made the laws and you have no right to second guess them. So that's the word "cut-off land." It's a "cut-off land," it's like a statute. This is the law, this is the way it works. Rava said: "It is logical like the opinion that says they are permitted." It makes sense like the opinion that says that the limbs of the goat that is sent away are indeed permitted. Why? "The Torah did not say to send it to cause a stumbling block." God would not tell you send it out where it could be a stumbling block. Because now you have somebody walking in the desert, he doesn't know anything, does he know this is the goat of Azazel? He sees bones in the desert, and therefore if it's going to be forbidden, you definitely cause a stumbling block that this guy is going to come in and use them. So therefore it's logical that it's permissible. Rashi says, "to a stumbling block, that a person will find them and benefit from them without knowing what they were." It should just be pointed out that this verse "I am the Lord," it's not written right after the Azazel service. The Maharsha points out that in the portion next to the Yom Kippur service, in Acharei Mot, at the end of Acharei Mot, it says "And you shall keep My statutes," etc. etc. "I am the Lord." So they're expounding from that verse that it's if it's going back on what it said also in the portion before it, just for clarification.
Now, comes the Gemara and says, "Our Rabbis taught in a Baraita: Azazel," we call the procedure the goat for Azazel. So what is this word Azazel? The Gemara says, "that it should be harsh and difficult." So "harsh," "El." "Harsh," it should be harsh, and "El" is rugged or fierce. Rashi says, "El is a term for difficult." El is strong or fierce. "Perhaps in a settled area?" You think you could do this in the settlement? "The verse comes to say 'in the desert.'" No, it has to be done in the desert. "And from where do we know that it is on a cliff?" So how do you know it's done on a cliff? "The verse comes to say 'cut-off land,'" which means it has to be... Okay, so that's the first exposition that the mountain itself is rugged and fierce in order to cut the goat into pieces. "It was taught in another Baraita: Azazel," "the hardest of mountains." Azazel was from the strongest and fiercest of mountains. "And so it says," "And he took the mighty of the land," which means the word "El" is strong and fierce. So Azazel has the word "El" in it which represents power and strength. "And the mighty of the land," that's a verse to prove that the word "El" is fierce and strong. The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: "Azazel," another reason why it's called Azazel, "that it atones for the deed of Uza and Azael," because it atones for the episode of Uza and Azael. What was that episode? Rashi tells us, "destructive angels," those were destructive angels, those were their names, "who descended to the earth in the days of Naamah, sister of Tuval-Kayin." We learn in the book of Genesis that these angels came down to the world, "and concerning them it is said, 'And the sons of God saw the daughters of man,'" and they saw the women of earth. And what happened? They committed immoral acts with them. "Meaning, it atones for immoral acts." Which means the Gemara is trying to say Azazel, it atones for sins of Uza and Azael. Their sin was immorality. So the general atonement of the goat for Azazel is for sins like the ones that were committed by the destructive angels, Uza and Azael, meaning it atones for forbidden sexual relations. "Our Rabbis taught in a Baraita." The Baraita quotes a verse that's at the end of Acharei Mot: "You shall do My judgments and keep My statutes to walk in them; I am the Lord your God." "Keep My judgments," that's my I guess statutes, "and My statutes," and my laws. "I am the Lord." So the Gemara says: "My judgments you shall do," what are the judgments? "Things that, had they not been written, it would be logical that they should be written." These judgments are the type of laws that even if they weren't written, you'd know as if they were written, which means they're logical things that you know are forbidden even without the Torah having to write them. "And these are they:" "idolatry," that's obvious. A person knows he has to believe in God, he cannot serve idolatry. "And forbidden sexual relations," immorality. "And bloodshed," that would be murder. "And robbery," thievery. "And blasphemy," and that would be referring to blasphemy, God forbid, the opposite of blessing God's name. "My statutes you shall keep." And what does it mean when it says keep my statutes? "Things that the Satan challenges." These are type of mitzvot that the Satan says, what are you doing, what's the reason, what's the purpose of these? For example, "And these are they:" "eating pork," eating pork, which is a statute. "And wearing mixed fabrics," right, wearing forbidden mixture of wool and linen. "And Halitzah of a Yevamah," the procedure of releasing a Yevamah by taking off the shoe and spitting in it in order to release a Yevamah so she can get married. "And the purification of a Metzora," the way we purify a Metzora by slaughtering birds and mixing the blood in water with a cedar wood and hyssop, and that makes the Metzora pure. "And the goat that is sent away," as well as the logic of the goat that is sent away. These are statutes. "And lest you say they are futile acts," and one might argue and say these are worthless actions, they don't make sense. "The verse comes to say: 'I am the Lord.'" So the verse says I am God. "I am the Lord, I have legislated them," I am the God that legislated them, "and you have no right to question them." Look at Rashi and you have no right to second guess them. Look at Rashi, the Satan. Actually, let's go to the one before that, a couple before that. "My judgments": "implies things that are straightforward," things that are straight, "and it is logical to do them," it's logical to keep them. "Statute": "implies that it is only a king's decree." It's a law, decree of the king, "like 'and he made it a statute,'" "and Joseph made it a statute," like different usages of the word statute. "The Satan": "the evil inclination challenges them," "to mislead Israel," "and to say that the Torah is not true." The Satan uses the statutes to come along and tell the people the Torah is not true. "For what benefit is there in all these?" What's the purpose of these laws that don't make sense? "And so it is written concerning them a statute:" "I am the Lord, I have decreed upon you." "The verse comes to say: 'I am the Lord,'" that's keep my statutes. It's going back on the statutes from which it arose, and that was the last thing it says: "You shall keep My statutes, I am the Lord, I have legislated and decreed."
Comes the Gemara and continues. "When do clothes become impure?" So what do we say? We said that the sending out of the goat that is sent away has the ability to make the clothes of the sender impure. "Our Rabbis taught in a Baraita: The sender makes clothes impure." The one that's sending it out, his clothes become impure. "But the one who sends the sender does not make clothes impure." But the one that sends him, which means all the ones that escort him from Jerusalem, they themselves do not become impure. "Perhaps from when he leaves outside the wall of the Temple courtyard?" When does the impurity of clothes kick in? Right when he leaves the Temple courtyard? "The verse comes to say: 'the sender,'" which literally means he has to be already sent towards his path in the desert. Rashi says, "implies that he has already sent him towards the desert." He's got to be on the road to the desert. "Or the sender, perhaps until he reaches the cliff?" So maybe until he's sent to his destination? Maybe the clothes do not become impure until he gets to the cliff? "The verse comes to say: 'and the sender,'" which means that teaches me. "How is this?" Which means we have a verse that's implied that it gets to the cliff and one verse is implied even when he gets out of the Temple courtyard. "How is this?" "From when he leaves outside the wall of Jerusalem," which is once he gets out of the wall of Jerusalem. So it means the sender, he has to be sent, but not arrived yet. That's already enough to be considered because the verse's language is, give you the verse, it says "And he who sends the goat to Azazel shall wash his clothes and bathe his body." So the whole discussion in Gemara is what does the word "the sender" mean? Is "the sender" mean he sent on his journey or "the sender" means no the one that actually gets there and is finishing his job to send it off the mountain? So therefore the Gemara is learning according to Rabbi Yehuda no "the sender" means the initial sending outside of the Temple courtyard already on the way to the desert. Right, outside the city actually, correct, outside the wall of Jerusalem, so that's already once he leaves Jerusalem the clothes become impure. According to Yehuda. Rabbi Yosi says, "Azazel and he shall wash." Right before the word "and he shall wash his clothes" it says the word Azazel. So what does he learn from that? "Until he reaches the cliff," meaning it's got to get to Azazel, he's got to get to the cliff, hence the word "Azazel and he shall wash." Rabbi Shimon says, "And he who sends the goat to Azazel shall wash his clothes," which means Rabbi Shimon comes along and says "he who sends the goat" which you actually have to send it off then already the clothes become impure. So therefore now we have a three-way dispute that the clothes become impure when he leaves Jerusalem, when he gets to the cliff, or read it together, "he who sends to Azazel" he's got to throw it off Azazel. Okay, the Gemara concludes over here and says, "He throws it headfirst and makes clothes impure." That's again the opinion of Rabbi Shimon that he says you throw it headfirst. "He holds that his pushing and throwing is his sending," meaning it's just finishing Rabbi Shimon's opinion. When you push the animal off, headfirst means over here is when it says "he shall wash his clothes," "he throws it headfirst," which we'll understand like we learned in the Mishnah when it says "from behind him," the animal is standing backwards, meaning that the head of the animal is facing the appointed man, the back of the animal is facing the cliff and somehow right as we see exactly and he would somehow grab it by the head headfirst and throw it off the mountain. So that's according to what we're learning over here, it comes out like I said you have a three-way dispute between the opinions either the clothes become impure at the time he leaves Jerusalem, the time that he gets to the cliff, or the time he throws him down from the cliff. But it's all dependent on how you learn the word "the sender" to what degree? "The sender" could either mean he left or when the verse says "to Azazel" he's got to get to the mountain or read it all together, "he who sends to Azazel" he's got to throw it off Azazel.
Okay, we begin the Mishnah which now continues the order of the High Priest on Yom HaKippurim and the Mishnah says, "He came to the bull and the goat that are to be burnt." Now he comes back after they sent out the goat for Azazel, he goes back to his bull, the bull of the High Priest and the goat for God, "that are to be burnt." Now these bulls, this bull and goat are burnt, which means they take the animals themselves and they go outside Jerusalem to a place called Beit HaDeshen and they burn them there. Now before they take them outside of Jerusalem, "he tore them open," they tear them open, "and removed their fats," that's the fats, the fats of these animals are brought on the altar. "He placed them in a vessel," they put them in a sacred vessel, "and burned them on the altar," and they bring them on the altar. Now what do you do with the rest of the animal, the bull and the goat? "He tore them open" and according to the version of the Yerushalmi, "with poles," they would have two poles. They would have four people, two in the front and two in the back holding these poles, and they would place the bull and goat whole, they were complete except for the incision that they removed their fats, and they were intertwined on as we could picture it like imagine a stretcher between two poles, you have a stretcher-like, and the animals are on top intertwined like locked into each other in the position one on top of the other interlocked like a braid, "and took them out to the place of burning." They would take them outside of Jerusalem to the place that was called as I said Beit HaSereifah, the place where they would burn them. "And when do clothes become impure?" Now those that involve themselves in taking the bull and goat out to the Beit HaSereifah, their clothes would become impure as the verse says "and he shall wash his clothes." So at what point does the impurity of clothes kick in? "From when they leave outside the wall of the Temple courtyard," once they leave the wall of the Temple courtyard that's one opinion. Rabbi Shimon says, "No, from when the fire consumes most of them," says no that once the fire consumes the majority of them then impurity of clothes kicks in the Gemara learned this from verses. Comes the Gemara and says, "And do you really think so?" What are you talking about? You're going to bring the bull and the goat to the altar? "And do you really think so?" That at this point they actually sacrifice it? So what's the problem? So Rashi explains it's too premature because there's still other services that must be done before this. For example, at this point the priest is still wearing white garments. The order of the day is he would then read the portion of Yom Kippur and then he would have to go to the ritual bath, he would go into the, sorry, go into the Holy of Holies, remove the censer, take the incense out, go to the ritual bath, change back into the golden garments, bring his ram, bring the ram of the people and bring the additional offering and then only after he would go back into his golden garments and then go out and bring the bull and the goat which is at the end. So the Gemara asks what do you mean? How do you think so? "And do you really think so?" That's still premature. To that the Gemara says you're right. The Gemara says, "Rather, say: to burn them on the altar." They would prepare them in their vessels, in their sacred vessels, in order that when the time comes they'll be able to bring them on the altar. Just let's read the Rashi. Let's start from the first wide line in Rashi, starting from "Rather, this is the difficulty for him." Starts from the first wide line in Rashi. "Rather, this is the difficulty for him: Do you really think so? Does he burn them now? But he is still wearing white garments, and he still has to read the portion in these garments, and afterwards he will immerse and wear golden garments for his ram and the ram of the people." And he brings the two rams. "And he will immerse a second time," to put back on the white garments, "to take out the spoon and censer" from the Holy of Holies. "And he will immerse a third time," he goes again and dips to put on golden garments "for the additional offerings and these fats of the sin offerings" and these offerings, these two bull and goat, "and the afternoon daily offering," because the afternoon daily offering which is the end of the service of the day. So the Gemara says, Rashi concludes, "as it is taught in our chapters below, rather, say: to burn them. He placed them in the vessel to burn them on the altar when their time comes." Blessed forever, Amen and Amen.