Reference for Yoma 124:20

אמר רבינא השתא דאמר רב חסדא מחוסר הגרלה כמחוסר מעשה דמי הא דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל שלמים ששחטן קודם שנפתחו דלתות ההיכל פסולין שנאמר (ויקרא ג, ב) ושחטו פתח אהל מועד בזמן שהוא פתוח ולא בזמן שהוא נעול

When it says: The one lamb shalt thou offer in the morning, and the other lamb shalt thou offer at even,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 4.');">¹¹</span> behold the daily duty is already stated, hence how do I apply the words: 'Two for the day'? I. e. , against the day. How is that? The continual morning offering was being slain on the north-western corner, on the second ring,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the north of the altar were rings, twenty four, six rows of four each, at which they slaughtered the animal offerings. (V. Mid. III, 5.) . On these rings the animals were securely tied before slaying. When the morning sacrifice was slain on the western side the light of the sun poured freely in, just as in the eve, when the sacrifice was slain on the eastern side, the rays of the sinking sun were unimpeded. Always in the direction opposite to the light of the day. Tosaf. suggests that the second ring rather than the first was used to prevent the animal from polluting the altar with excrements.');">¹⁵</span> whereas that of the even was slain on the north-eastern corner on the second ring.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the north of the altar were rings, twenty four, six rows of four each, at which they slaughtered the animal offerings. (V. Mid. III, 5.) . On these rings the animals were securely tied before slaying. When the morning sacrifice was slain on the western side the light of the sun poured freely in, just as in the eve, when the sacrifice was slain on the eastern side, the rays of the sinking sun were unimpeded. Always in the direction opposite to the light of the day. Tosaf. suggests that the second ring rather than the first was used to prevent the animal from polluting the altar with excrements.');">¹⁵</span> But the additional sacrifices of the Sabbath certainly must be alike.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Since in connection with this only 'two lambs' is stated (V. Num. XXVIII, 9) but not the inclusive 'one lamb'. V, Rashi and R. Han.]');">¹⁶</span> Our Rabbis taught: If he [the high priest] slew two he-goats of the Day of Atonement outside [the Temple court] before the lots were cast, then he is guilty in respect of both; if, however, after the lot was cast, the is guilty<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the score of Lev. XVI, 3ff:');">¹⁷</span> in respect of the one cast 'for the Lord', but free in respect of the one cast 'for Azazel'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The he-goat destined for Azazel would in any case be killed outside the Sanctuary hence nothing illegitimate took place, no change of place.');">¹⁸</span> If before he has cast the lots, he is guilty in respect of both of them. But what [sacrifice] are they fit for?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he should be liable for slaughtering them outside the Temple court.');">¹⁹</span> - Said R'Hisda: Since [each] is fit to be offered up as the he-goat [the rites of which are] performed without.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e.,in the Sanctuary proper, without the Holy of Holies. The additional sacrifice for the Day of Atonement, a he-goat, is offered up, its blood sprinkled without (Num. XXIX, 11) .');">²⁰</span> But why is it impossible to offer it up as the he-goat [of which rites are] performed within [the Holy of Holies]? presumably because it still lacks the casting of the lot? But then it ought to be unfit to be used as the he-goa [of which rites are performed] without, for the reason that it still lacks the other ministrations of the Day?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' i.e., the sprinkling of the blood of the bullock and he-goat and the taking and offering of the handfuls of incense, all of which must take place before the additional sacrifice is offered up.');">²¹</span> - R'Hisda holds: One may not call the absence of any functions due on the same day a lack of time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The absence of the ministrations of the day mentioned in n. 3 does not affect the validity of the he-goat offered as an additional offering, as these do not constitute a defect in the he-goat itself, but are absent because the time for them had not yet arrived. Whatsoever is bound to come within the day, may not be considered wanting on that day. [This distinguishes it from the casting of lots, the absence of which constitutes a lack in the very he-goat which consequently renders it unfit for use within].');">²²</span> Said Rabina: Now that R'Hisda said that the absence of the casting of the lot has the same significance as the absence of a [direct] action,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the offering itself, rendering it unfit for Temple use.');">²³</span> then in view of what Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: 'Peace-offerings which have been slain before the doors of the Temple have been opened are invalid, as it is said: And he shall slay it at the gate of the tent of meeting,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. III, 2.');">²⁴</span> i.e., at the time when it is open, but not when i is closed';

Jastrow