1) (Vayikra 4:15): "And the elders of the congregation (shall place their hands upon the head of the bullock"): I might think old people from the marketplace; it is, therefore, written: "the elders of the congregation" (i.e., beth-din). If "the elders of the congregation," I might think all the elders in the congregation (i.e., even the beth-din of twenty-three); it is, therefore, written "the congregation," the distinctive of the congregation (i.e., the Great Sanhedrin). 2) And how many (elders) are they? "And they shall place" — two; "elders" — two; beth-din cannot be equi-balanced (a condition which might result in a judicial stalemate) — (one is added), all together, five. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon says: "And the elders shall place" — two; beth-din cannot be equi-balanced — (one is added), all together, three. 3) "their hands" — the (two) hands of each one. "upon the head of the bullock": The bullock requires semichah, but the idolatry goats do not require semichah. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Shimon says: The bullock requires semichah by the elders; the idolatry goats do not require semichah by the elders, (but by the Cohein). For R. Shimon says: Every communal sin-offering whose blood enters within (to be sprinkled on the golden altar) requires semichah. 4) "And he shall slaughter the bullock before the L–rd" — in the north. It is written here (Vayikra 4:17): "before the parocheth," and elsewhere, (Vayikra 4:6): "before the parocheth." Just as "parocheth" there is "before the parocheth of the holiness" (i.e., in alignment with the staves of the ark), so, "parocheth" here is before the parocheth of the holiness. 5) (Vayikra 4:20): ("And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock of the sin-offering (of the high-priest); so shall he do with this. And the Cohein shall make atonement for them and it shall be forgiven them.") "And he shall do … as he did … and he shall make atonement." Why is this mentioned? To "double" the sprinklings. To teach that if one (sprinkling) were lacking, he did nothing. This tells me only of the seven sprinklings (on the parocheth), failing (even one of) which, nothing has been done. For seven sprinklings are always categorical requirements. But whence do we derive that the same is true for the four applications (of blood on the inner altar)? From "so shall he do." 6) "And he shall do with the bullock": to include the Yom Kippur bullock. "As he did with the bullock": to include the bullock of the high-priest. "the sin-offering": to include the idolatry goats. — But perhaps I should include the festival goats (for the inner service and for burning)! It is, therefore, written (to exclude the festival goats): "so shall he do with this." Why do you see fit to include the idolatry goats and to exclude the festival goats? After Scripture includes, it excludes. I include the idolatry goats, which are brought for transgression of a known mitzvah (as is the bullock in our verse), and I exclude the festival goats, which are not brought for the transgression of a known mitzvah, (but for possible defilement of sanctuary and sacred objects). 7) "And the Cohein shall make atonement for them": even if they (the elders of beth-din) did not perform semichah. "and it shall be forgiven them": even if he did not pour the remnants of the blood (at the base of the outer altar.) Why do you see fit to make it kasher in (the absence of) semichah and (of pouring) the remnants of the blood, and pasul in (the absence of any of) the (seven) sprinklings? After Scripture includes, it excludes. Why do I make it kasher in (the absence of) semichah and (of pouring) the remnants of the blood? Because they are not categorical requirements for atonement (in other instances). And I make it pasul in (the absence of) sprinklings because they are categorical requirements for atonement (in other instances). 8) (Vayikra 4:21): "And he shall take the bullock outside the camp": outside the three camps (see Chapter 5:4); "and he shall burn it as he burned the first bullock": So that if the bullock of the high-priest and the bullock of the congregation are waiting (sacrifice), the first takes precedence in all services (see Section 4:1). 9) I might think that even the idolatry goats precede it (the bullock of the congregation). And it would, indeed, follow (that they should), viz.: If the bullock of an individual (the high-priest) precedes it, should not the idolatry goats of the congregation precede it! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): ("the first) bullock." The bullock is first, and not the idolatry goats. 10) — But perhaps the meaning is: The bullock is to be burnt, but the idolatry goats are not to be burnt! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "It is the sin-offering of the assembly": It is a general rule (binyan av) that all communal sin-offerings are to be burnt. 11) But are not the festival goats communal sin-offerings? Shall I say they are to be burnt? It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "It" (is the sin-offering of the assembly.) Now why do you see fit to include the idolatry goats (for burning) and to exclude the festival goats? After Scripture includes, it excludes. I include the idolatry goats, which are brought for transgression of a known mitzvah, and I exclude the festival goats, which are not brought for transgression of a known mitzvah. 12) — But the Yom Kippur bullock is not brought for transgression of a known mitzvah, in spite of which it requires burning! — That (the Yom Kippur bullock) is distinctive in that its blood enters within (the heichal). So, all (offerings) whose blood enters within (are to be burnt). — to exclude these (the festival goats), whose blood does not enter within. 13) "sin-offering": All of its services must be intended for a sin-offering. "It": to exclude its being slaughtered without intent (for a sin-offering).
Sifra Chovah Chapter 6
Tap any verse to see what it echoes — and start a chain or echo from it.