Study Yoma folio 51B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
ותיפוק לי ד״אשר לו״ אמר רחמנא — משלו הוא מביא.
§ Returning to R' Elazar’s question as to whether a High Priest can perform substitution for his bull, the Talmud seeks to prove that the other priests were not full partners in this offering but only gained atonement incidentally. And let me derive this halakha from the fact that God states: “And Aaron should sacrifice the bull of the sin-offering, which is for himself” (Leviticus 16:11), indicating that the High Priest brings the bull from his own property.
דתניא: ״אשר לו״ — משלו הוא מביא, ולא משל ציבור. יכול לא יביא משל ציבור — שאין הציבור מתכפרין בו, אבל יביא משל אחיו הכהנים — שהרי אחיו הכהנים מתכפרים בו, תלמוד לומר: ״אשר לו״.
As it was taught in a baraita: “Which is for himself” means that he brings it from his own property and not from the property of the community. I might have thought that the High Priest may not bring this offering from the property of the community because the community as a whole does not gain atonement through it, but he may bring it from the property of his fellow priests, as his fellow priests do gain atonement through it. Therefore the verse states: “Which is for himself,” i.e., it must belong to him and no one else.
יכול לא יביא, ואם הביא כשר — תלמוד לומר שוב: ״אשר לו״ — שנה הכתוב עליו לעכב.
I might have thought that the High Priest should not bring the bull from the property of the other priests ab initio, but if he did bring it from their property, the offering is valid. Therefore, the verse continues and states again: “And he should slaughter the bull for the sin-offering, which is for himself” (Leviticus 16:11); the text repeats this phrase: “Which is for himself,” to emphasize that this requirement is indispensable and that if the High Priest brings a bull that belongs to someone else, the offering is invalid.