The Torah said "Goralos'' - lots of any material.

Perhaps he can have two lots of [la'Shem] and two lots of [Azazel]! It says "Goralos Goral Echad la'Shem v'Goral Echad la'Azazel.''

Suggestion: Perhaps he puts [the lot] la'Shem and that of Azazel on this [goat] and on this one!

Objection: Was this not the previous suggestion?!

Explanation: It means as follows. Perhaps after putting [the lot] for Hash-m on [the goat] for Hash-m, and [the lot] for Azazel on [the goat] for Azazel, he switches (and puts each on the other)! It says "Goral Echad la'Shem'' - there is only one [lot on the goat] for Hash-m. "V'Goral Echad la'Azazel'' - there is only one [lot on the goat] for Azazel.

The Tzitz - on it was written Kodesh la'Shem. Kodesh was below, and Hash-m above. This is like a king who sits in his throne. Similarly, [the lot for Hash-m had] Lamed below, and Hash-m's name above.

R. Elazar bei R. Yosi: I saw [the Tzitz] in Romi (when he was permitted to enter their treasure house, which included what they pillaged from the Mikdash). Only one line was written on it, Kodesh la'Shem.

"V'Nasan Aharon'' - if a Zar put [the lots on the goats] it is Kosher. If a Zar lifted [the lots out of the box] it is Pasul.

Question: A Kal v'Chomer [teaches otherwise]! Regarding putting [the lots on the goats] it is written Aharon, and if a Zar put it is Kosher. Regarding lifting it is not written Aharon, all the more so (if a Zar lifted it is Kosher)!

Answer: We need not say so (rather, we can say oppositely). Putting is not Me'akev - therefore, if a Zar put it is Kosher. Lifting is Me'akev. Therefore, if a Zar lifted it is Pasul.

Support (R. Yitzchak bar Chakula citing R. Yanai): Lifting out of the box is Me'akev. Putting is not Me'akev.

(R. Yochanan): He may fix them even verbally.

Assumption: [He may fix] even one today and one tomorrow.

According to R. Yochanan [who says that he may fix them even verbally], why does it say Goralos? This is a Mitzvah (l'Chatchilah).

Question: A Beraisa argues with R. Yochanan! The Goral makes it a Chatas, and the name (verbal declaration) does not make it a Chatas.

Answer: [The Beraisa] discusses when he wants to do a lottery. (Then, verbal declaration does not help.)

Question: A Beraisa argues with R. Yanai! If he did not do a lottery, and did not confess [over Se'ir ha'Mishtale'ach], it is Kosher, just he omitted one Mitzvah;

Answer: [The Beraisa means that he did a lottery and lifted the lot from the box, but he lacked] putting [it on the goat].

Question (against R. Yanai): "La'Shem'' includes Se'ir ha'Mishtale'ach. It is Pasul due to Mechusar Zman. (Why do we need a verse? Neither goat may be Mechusar Zman, for) one must be concerned lest the lot for Hash-m come on it!

Answer: [It must disqualify in a case that one goat was Mechusar Zman, and] the lottery succeeded (it became the Se'ir ha'Mishtale'ach, and the Chatas was not Mechusar Zman. The Drashah disqualifies the Se'ir ha'Mishtale'ach. We explained like SHA'AREI TORAS ERETZ YISRAEL and NO'AM YERUSHALAYIM.)