David Volgger, «The Day of Atonement according to the Temple Scroll», Vol. 87 (2006) 251-260
The Temple Scroll (11Q19) dedicates about two and a half columns to the Day of
Atonement (25,10-27,10). The present study concentrates on the content of the
transmitted text (25,10-16; 26-3-13, and 27,01-02.1-10), analyses its structure,
and explains its development of thought. The focus of the text seems to be on the
concept of the sin-offering. First, the sin-offering of a he-goat makes part of the
common festival sacrifice. Second, the two rams belong as burnt-offering to the
special sin-offering of the Feast. And third, a he-goat for YHWH is offered as a
special sin-offering on the altar of burnt-offering, whereas, a second he-goat for
Azazel bears all the sins of Israel and is sent out into the desert. Since the he-goat
for Azazel does not get in touch with the altar of burnt-offering, it cannot be
classified as a burnt-offering. Moreover, it shares only one major feature with the
other sin-offerings, namely, to remove sins.
The Day of Atonement according to the Temple Scroll 257
high priest “outside the camp (or city) of the sanctuary, at a separate place
for the sin-offerings†twafjl ldbwm µwqmb ?çdwqh hnjm¿l ≈wjm (9). In this
context, lines 26,5-10 draw more attention. Twice they mention a bullock that
should serve as a model for the offering of the he-goat. First, the rite of
blood should be identical for both sacrifices as 26,6-7 underlines:
wl rça rph µdl h?ç[ rçak wm¿dl hç?[w¿ “and he treats its blood as he did the
blood of the bullock which was for himselfâ€. Second, some portions of the
he-goat should be burnt beside his bullock as 26,9 orders: wrp lxa wpwrçy “they
burn it beside his bullockâ€. Furthermore, in addition to the he-goat for
YHWH, the agenda refers to a bullock that belongs to the category “sin-
offeringâ€. Subsequently it must be distinguished from the burnt-offering in
25,13-14. The text of 26,5-10 does not indicate further details on how to offer
the bullock (10). However, its offering is structurally comparable to the burnt-
offering belonging to the sin-offering of atonement in section III and V (11).
Several cult persons may slaughter the first he-goat and burn special
portions of it. But only the high priest is authorized to perform the blood rite
and to offer the fat, the cereal offerings, and libations (26,5-8). Regarding the
blood rite, lines 26,5-6 offer more details. “And the priest will receive its
blood in the golden sprinkling bowl which he has in his handâ€
?wd¿yb rça bhzh qrzmb wmd ta ?ˆhwkh lbqw¿. Subsequently, the lines 26,6-7 refer
to the treatment of the blood in a rather general way: “and he treats its
blood as he did the blood of the bullock which was for himselfâ€
wl rça rph µdl h?ç[ rçak wm¿dl hç?[w¿. Line 26,7 also emphasizes that “he will
atone with it for all the people of the assembly†lhqh µ[ lwk l[ wb rpkw. The
phrase most probably indicates the blood that brings atonement (12). The same
phrase is repeated in 26,9. However, this time it is done in the context of “the
sin-offering of the assembly†lhqh tafj (26,9). So the effect of atonement is
ascribed to the entire sin-offering.
The high priest must perform not only the blood rite. He also
must perform “the burning of the he-goat’s fat and the cereal offering
of its libation on the altar of burnt-offering†(cf. 26,7-8): tjnm taw wblj taw
hlw[h jbzm l[ ryfqy wksn. The phrase wksn tjnm in 26,7-8 refers to the cereal
offering and libation that the Calendar has already fixed for every sacrificial
(9) Cf. J. MILGROM, “Further Studies in the Temple Scrollâ€, JQR 71 (1980) 89-90.
(10) YADIN, The Temple Scroll, I, 134 defines the chronological sequence of the ritual
as following: “... first, the bullock is offered and all procedures involving it are completed:
sprinkling the blood, offering the sacrificial portions and burning the flesh; the male goat
is then disposed of in the same manner; then the priest laves himself and approaches the
living goat, and only at the very end are the burnt-offerings sacrificedâ€. Yadin hardly pays
attention to the change of actors in the cult since the high priest acts exclusively in the inner
courtyard, never outside the camp or the city where the remaining portions of the sin-
offering must be burned. Moreover the text of the TR requires the priority of the bullock
only for two particular actions, namely for the blood rite and the burning of the sin-offering
outside the camp or the city.
(11) This is maybe the reason why J. MAIER, Die Tempelrolle vom Toten Meer,
München 1997, 125 has put a question mark after the phrase about the two rams in 25,16.
Nevertheless, they cannot be replaced by two bullocks in this context.
(12) SCHIFFMAN, “The Case of Atonement Ritualâ€, 186-187 considers the verb rpk in
this cultic context as a technical term for the sprinkling of the blood (cf. Lev 16,15-16). The
relevant text of the Temple Scroll, however, does not mention cultual details but provides
only the same procedure for the blood of the he-goat as for the bullock (cf. 26,6-7).