1) "and he shall place his hand … and he shall slaughter": In the place (the azarah) where semichah is performed, shechitah is performed, and shechitah must follow immediately upon semichah. Just as semichah obtains only with those who are clean (from defilement), so, shechitah. 2) "and he shall slaughter": This teaches us that shechitah is kasher with zarim (non-Cohanim), women, bondsmen, and the unclean, even with higher-order offerings, so long as the unclean do not touch the flesh. Or, perhaps only a Cohein may perform shechitah! — Now, "where are you coming from?" (i.e., What is your source?) From (Bamidbar 18:7): "And you and your sons with you shall guard your priesthood for all that pertains to the altar." I might think that this includes shechitah. But (Vayikra 1:5): "And the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim, shall present the blood, and they shall dash the blood, etc." indicates that from this point on (i.e., receiving the blood) is the mitzvah of the priesthood; but shechitah is kasher with all persons. 3) (Vayikra 1:5): "the bullock before the L–rd": and not the slaughterer before the L–rd." (If the slaughterer stood outside the azarah and performed shechitah with a long knife, the shechitah would be valid.) Shimon Hatemani says: Whence is it derived that the hand of the shochet should be on the "inside" of the animal being slaughtered (and not on the outside towards the entrance of the azarah)? From: "and he shall slaughter the bullock before the L–rd." 4) (Vayikra 1:5) "and the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim, shall present (vehikrivu) the blood": I might think that this refers to z'rikah (dashing the blood on the altar). But z'rikah is already mentioned (following). How, then, am I to understand "vehikrivu"? As referring to the receiving of the blood — that it be done only by a Cohein kasher, and with a ministering vessel. R. Akiva said: Whence is it derived that the receiving of the blood be done only by a Cohein kasher? Kihun (priesthood) is mentioned here ("the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim"), and it is mentioned elsewhere [(Bamidbar 3:3): "These are the names of the sons of Aaron, whom he invested lechahein"]. Just as the kihun there is with a Cohein kasher and ministering vessels, so, the kihun here (in respect to the receiving of the blood). 5) R. Tarfon said to him: Akiva, how long will you continue "piling up" verses and bringing us (identities)! May I be bereaved if I did not hear that there is a difference between receiving and dashing (the blood. How, then, can you compare them!); but I cannot recall it (the difference) — whereupon R. Akiva said: Allow me to repeat to you something that you taught me. R. Tarfon: Say on. R. Akiva: With kabbalah (receiving), thought (of kabbalah) is not accounted act (so that a "negative" kabbalah thought does not invalidate the service), whereas with z'rikah (dashing), thought is accounted act. One who receives the blood outside (the azarah) is not liable; one who dashes it outside, is. If unclean persons received it, they are not liable; if they dashed it, they are. R. Tarfon: May I be bereaved that you have not swerved right or left (i.e., if you have not spoken truly)! I did, indeed, hear it, but it slipped my mind, and you expound (verses) and restore the teaching. Whoever departs from you departs from life. 6) "the sons of Aaron": I might think (that they are fit for the service) even if they are challalim (children of marriages forbidden to Cohanim); it is, therefore, written (Ibid.): "the Cohanim" — to exclude challalim. I would exclude these, but not those who are blemished. It is, therefore, written "the sons of Aaron." Just as Aaron is kasher, so, his children — to exclude challalim and those who are blemished. 7) "and the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim, shall present the blood and they shall dash the blood." Why the repetition? Whence is it derived that if the blood of an olah got intermixed with that of a different olah, or with that of a temurah or with that of chullin, that it should be offered? From "the blood." I might think that this is so because the same applies even to live animals that got mixed up (see Section 3:14). Whence do I derive that the same applies even if it (the blood) became intermixed with that of an asham (where the same does not apply to live animals?) I would include asham, for both (olah and asham) are higher-order offerings. And whence would I derive that the same applies even with shelamim and todah? I would include shelamim and todah, for both (these and olah) entail four applications (of blood upon the altar). And whence would I derive that the same applies even with bechor, ma'aser and pesach? From (the repetition of) "the blood." 8) I might think that the same applied even if it got intermixed with (the blood of) p'sulin; it is, therefore, written (Ibid. 11); "and the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim, shall dash) its blood." I would exclude p'sulin, which are not kasher as offerings. Whence would I derive (that the blood of the olah is permitted) even if it got mixed up with inner sin-offerings? I would exclude inner sin-offerings, those being inner and that (the olah), outer (see Section 3:14). Whence would I derive the exclusion) even in the instance of outer sin-offerings? It is, therefore, written: "its blood." 9) (Vayikra 1:5): "And they shall dash the blood (on the altar roundabout"): I might think one dashing; it is, therefore, written "roundabout." If "roundabout," I might think they encircle it (with blood) in a line; it is, therefore, written "and they shall dash." How is this to be effected? Two applications, which are four (i.e., two "dashings" from a vessel on two diagonally opposite corners of the altar). 10) R. Yishmael says: "roundabout" is written here, and "roundabout" is written elsewhere (in respect to the investiture sin-offering [chatath hamiluim]). Just as "roundabout" there entails a pause for (each of) four applications (of blood), so, "roundabout" here entails a pause for (each of) four applications (on two corners) [one on each side of the corner]). 11) "And the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim, shall present the blood and they shall sprinkle the blood": Why the repetition? Whence do you derive that if the blood spilled from the vessel to the floor and it was gathered up it is kasher? From the repetition of "the blood." I might think that even if it spilled from the beast's throat to the floor it should be gathered up; it is, therefore, written "the blood," the blood that was received in a vessel. 12) "the blood on the altar" — And not the dasher (of the blood) on the altar (i.e., he should not stand on the foundation of the altar [the yesod], but on the floor alongside it). Another nuance of "the blood on the altar" — (the blood should be dashed on the altar) even in the absence of the flesh (e.g., if it became unclean or were lost.) If so, how am I to understand (Devarim 12:27): "And you shall sacrifice your burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood"? Blood and flesh are being likened to each other, viz., just as the blood is flung on the altar, so, the flesh. I might think he flings them (the pieces) so that they form a pile; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 1:12): "And the Cohein shall arrange them." How is this (fling-arrange) to be reconciled? He flings them in such a way that they fall into an orderly arrangement. 13) (Vayikra 1:5): "on the altar roundabout" — when it is "roundabout" (i.e., entirely intact), and not when one of its horns is incomplete. If it was, and he performed the service on it, it is pasul. 14) (Vayikra 1:5): "at the entrance of the tent of meeting" — and not when it has been dismantled or when the wind has furled the curtain. R. Yossi Haglili says: What is the intent of "at the entrance of the tent of meeting"? Because it is written (Shemoth 40:7): "And you shall place the laver (hakiyor) between the tent of meeting and the altar," I might think (directly) between the tent of meeting and the altar; it is, therefore, written "the altar roundabout, which is at the entrance of the tent of meeting" — the altar is at the entrance of the tent of meeting, and not the laver. Where, then, was the laver placed? Between the ulam (the hall leading to the interior of the sanctuary) and the altar, somewhat removed (from the corner of the altar) towards the south (so that the laver was indirectly between the tent of meeting and the altar.)
Sifra Nedavah Section 4
Tap any verse to see what it echoes — and start a chain or echo from it.