Yerushalmi Yoma 6:1 ירושלמי יומא ו׳:א׳

MISHNAH: The commandment for the two he-goats of the Day of Atonement is that they be equal in looks, in height, and in value, and be bought simultaneously. Even if they are not equal they are qualified; if one was bought one day and the other the next day¹Or any other day. they are qualified. If one of them dies, if it died before he²The High Priest. drew lots he should take a match for the second one; if it dies after he drew lots one brings two and he draws new lots for them.
Then he shall say if the one for Hashem³Cf. Chapter 4, Note 2. dies, “the one for which the lot for Hashem is drawn shall be taken in its stead.⁴Since only one new he-goat is needed; the second one was taken only to satisfy the requirement that lots be drawn for any he-goat used in the service.” And if the one for Azazel died, “the one for which the lot for Azazel is drawn shall be taken in its stead.” The second one shall graze until it becomes unfit, then be sold, and its proceeds used for voluntary sacrifices⁵The monies to be used to buy elevation sacrifices for times when otherwise the altar would be idle. since no public purification sacrifice is allowed to die⁶In contrast to private purification sacrifices which are not used because the owner used another animal in its stead. It cannot be used for another person, cannot be redeemed, and cannot be used in any other way.. Rebbi Jehudah says, it shall die. In addition, Rebbi Jehudah says, if the blood is spilled the one to be sent away shall die, if the one to be sent away dies the blood shall be spilled⁷Since R. Jehudah holds that if for any reason one of the he-goats or its blood cannot be used, the other cannot be used either and has to be let to die..

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.

[Sheep¹⁰Ex. 27:38, Num. 28:3., the minimum of sheep are two. If so, why does it say two? That both be equal.]¹¹Corrector’s addition from the parallel sources.

Birds¹²Lev. 14:4., the minimum of birds are two. If so, why does it say two? That both be equal.

Trumpets¹³Num. 10:2., the minimum of trumpets are two. If so, why does it say two? that both be equal.

Rebbi Haggai objected before Rebbi Yose. Is there not written¹⁴Deut. 19:17.: The two men who have the lawsuit shall stand before the Eternal? Now men, is not two the minimum of “men”? If so, why does it say two? That both be equal? But it is written¹⁵Deut. 24:17.: Do not bend the lawsuit of the proselyte, the orphan,… So we find that a proselyte can have a lawsuit against one who is not a proselyte, an orphan may have a lawsuit against one who is not an orphan, a widow against somebody who is not a widow. Then why does the verse say two? It is free to be combined and one may infer from it an equal cut. It is said here two and it is said there two. Since there two means men but not women nor underaged, also here two means men but not women nor underaged. From this we learn that a woman may not be a (judge) [witness]; consequently a woman may not be a (witness) [judge]¹⁶The scribe’s text in parentheses conforms to the parallels; the corrector’s in brackets is more logical..

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun, Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi Yose. It is said here two,[by the mouth of two witnesses¹⁷Deut. 17:6.], and it is said there two, two men remained in the camp¹⁸Num. 11:27.. Since there two means men but not women nor underaged, also here two means men but not women nor underaged. Then why is it said (two) [and the two men shall stand]¹⁹If actually the same price was paid for the two he-goats used on the Day of Atonement, but if they were regularly sold in the market one of them clearly would fetch a higher price, they are not disqualified but do not fulfill the biblical requirement of equality.? Lest one of them be standing while the other be sitting; [one is silent while the other talks]¹¹Corrector’s addition from the parallel sources., one says everything he has to say, but to the other one says, make your statement short. With one the judge is friendly, to the other he is unfriendly, lets one sit and the other stand. [They said in the name of Rebbi Ismael, one says to him, either you dress as he is dressed or pay him to be dressed as you are.]¹¹Corrector’s addition from the parallel sources.

Rebbi Jehudah said, I heard that if the judge wants to let both of them sit, he may tell them to sit down. What is forbidden is that one be standing and the other sitting; or that one says everything he has to say, but to the other one says, make your statement short, etc.

Rebbi Abba said in the name of Rav Ḥuna: The witnesses have to stand while testifying. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Also the parties have to stand at the moment the testimony is delivered..

If they are equal in price but unequal in value, the he-goats are not as commanded¹⁹If actually the same price was paid for the two he-goats used on the Day of Atonement, but if they were regularly sold in the market one of them clearly would fetch a higher price, they are not disqualified but do not fulfill the biblical requirement of equality.; equal in value but not equal in price, the he-goats are as commanded. Better in its body²⁰Having more meat. or better in its looks, what is preferable? Rebbi Jeremiah thought to say²¹This is the only opinion we have on the problem but it is not necessarily to be followed in practice if the Temple will be rebuilt. that we may understand it from the following: Of cut greenish and dry uncut, cut greenish is preferable²²This refers to the ˋomer, the sacrifice of first barley (Lev. 2:14) which has to be greenish grain parched with fire, peeled barley of the fresh ear. While the ˋomer should be freshly cut, if the choice is only between cut moist or uncut completely dry barley, cut moist grain is preferable since this is explicitly required by the verse. אָבִיב is barley which is edible but still has a moist greenish tint; in Southern Germany known as Grünkern. Cf. Tosephta Menaḥot 10:33.. This implies, better in its body [or better in its looks]²³Corrector’s addition. It might be that the scribe’s second “better in its body” is dittography, which would make the correction unnecessary., better in its body is preferable.

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.]

³²Text from Chapter 5, Notes 141–143. If he drew lots for three pairs²The High Priest., 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 him, 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.

“Since no public purification sacrifice is let to die⁶In contrast to private purification sacrifices which are not used because the owner used another animal in its stead. It cannot be used for another person, cannot be redeemed, and cannot be used in any other way.. Rebbi Jehudah says, it shall die.” It is difficult for Rebbi Jehudah: does one draw lots originally to die? Rebbi Abun said, do we not find this following Rebbi Eliezer³³It is sinful to try to replace a validly dedicated animal by an other (Lev. 27:10). In the case of (voluntary) well-being offerings, both animals are dedicated as well-being offerings. For obligatory offerings, two animals cannot be brought instead of one. In Mishnah Temurah 3:3, the majority rules that the replacement of a valid reparation offering and any of its offspring shall be put out to graze until they develop a defect which makes them unfit as sacrifices, then be sold, and the proceeds given to the Temple to be used for additional sacrifices, But R. Eliezer rules that they have to be allowed to die immediately without any benefit to the Temple. R. Jehudah as student of his father R. Illay, a student of R. Eliezer, can be presumed to follow the latter’s teachings., as Rebbi Eliezer said, they shall die? Rebbi Mana said, what you ask about Rebbi Jehudah you should ask about the Mishnah, as we have stated there³⁴Mishnah Temurah 4:1. In case of a purification offering everybody agrees with R. Eliezer, and one of the he-goats for which lots are drawn is a purification offering., “the calf of a purification offering, and the replacement of a purification offering, and a purification offering whose owners died, shall die.” Would a person replace originally to die?