1) (Vayikra 10:12): "And Moses spoke to Aaron and to Elazar and Ithamar his sons": His sons were equal to him in (deserving) honor and they were equal to him in keeping silent (viz. Vayikra 10:3). I might think that his first sons, too, (Nadav and Avihu) were equal to him in honor. It is, therefore, written (of Elazar and Ithamar) "his remaining sons." His remaining sons were equal to him in honor, but not the first ones. 2) R. Shimon b. Gamliel said in the name of R. Elazar b. Azaryah: It is written (Bamidbar 3:4): "And Nadav and Avihu died before the L–rd in offering a strange fire before the L–rd in the desert of Sinai; and they did not have sons. And Elazar and Ithamar officiated as priests in the presence of Aaron their father." For if they did have sons, they would have taken precedence to Elazar and Ithamar. For all who take precedence in inheritance take precedence in (assuming a position of) honor. If so, why is it written "his remaining sons"? Moses said to them: Should you not observe (i.e., imprint upon your minds) what happened to these (Nadav and Avihu) because they did not take counsel (see Miluim Shemini 32) and they were swept away? R. Eliezer says: They were close to being swept away (because of the sin of the golden calf made by Aaron), but the L–rd pitied Aaron (and left a "remnant" for him). 3) (Vayikra 10:12) "Take the meal-offering": This is the meal-offering of Nachshon (viz. Bamidbar 7:12-13). "remaining (from the fire-offerings of the L–rd"): This is the meal-offering of the eighth day (viz. Vayikra 9:4). "from the fire-offerings of the L–rd": They can eat it only after (the sacrifice of) the fire-offerings. 4) (Vayikra 10:12) "and eat it unleavened": What is the intent of this? (i.e., it has already been stated, viz. Vayikra 6:9). Because it is a communal meal-offering, and was prescribed only for that time, and not for succeeding generations, it had to be stated "and eat it unleavened." 5) "beside the altar": and not in the sanctuary, and not on top of the altar. This tells me only of this (the meal-offering). Whence do we derive for inclusion (all) holy of holies? From: ("for it is) holy of holies." "it" (above) and "it" (Vayikra 6:13) ("And you shall eat it") and "it" (Vayikra 6:13) ("and the portion of your sons is it") are (three) terms of exclusion — to exclude (from being eaten beside the altar): the thanksgiving offering and its bread, the ram of the Nazirite and its bread, the miluim ram and its bread, (which may be eaten in all of Jerusalem). 6) "And you shall eat it in a holy place": What is the intent of this? Because it is written "beside the altar," I might think that (it must be eaten) right next to the altar. Whence do I derive for inclusion the compartments built outside the (azarah), but opening into it? From "in a holy place." 7) "for it is your portion and the portion of your sons": but not that of your daughters. "from the fire-offerings of the L–rd": They can eat it only after (the sacrifice of) the fire-offerings. 8) (Vayikra 10:12): ("Take the meal-offering remaining) … (Vayikra 10:13) for thus have I been commanded." (Vayikra 10:16): ("And for the goat of the sin-offering [of the additional offerings of the New Moon] Moses inquired … (Vayikra 10:18) You should have eaten it in the holy place) as I had commanded." (Vayikra 10:14): ("And the breast of the waving and the shok of the lifting shall you eat in a clean place) … (Vayikra 10:15) as the L–rd has commanded." (Why are all of these "commanded" needed?) "for thus have I been commanded" — to tell you that you should eat the meal-offering even though you are in mourning (aninuth, for Nadav and Avihu). "as I had commanded" — at the time (in respect to the meal-offering, that it should be eaten). "as the L–rd has commanded" — and it is not of my own volition that I tell you to eat it (in your mourning). 9) (Vayikra 10:14): "And the breast of the waving and the shok of the lifting shall you eat in a clean place": "the breast" — as stated; "the waving" — This is the waving of the basket; "shok" — as stated; "lifting" — This is the lifting of the thank-offering. "shall you eat in a clean place": R. Nechemiah queried: Are the first ones (mentioned), then, not to be eaten in a clean place! — (The reference is to) a clean place which is not (entirely) tamei, (i.e., the encampment of Israel), which is clean of leper tumah, (lepers being sent out of that encampment), (but not clean of other types of tumah), which is to say that they are to be eaten in the midst of Jerusalem. 10) "you and your sons and your daughters": (Does this mean) you and your sons having a portion, and your daughters (not having a portion, but being permitted) a gift? Or, you, your sons, and your daughters having a portion? — "for it is your portion and the portion of your sons" (Vayikra 10:13) tells us that daughters do not have a portion. How, then, am I to understand "you and your sons and your daughters"? You and your sons have a portion; your daughters (are permitted) gifts. 11) (Vayikra 10:14): "They are given from the sacrifices of the peace-offerings of the children of Israel" — including the communal peace-offerings that obtained that day, as it is written (Vayikra 9:4) "and an ox and a ram for peace-offerings to sacrifice before the L–rd." (Vayikra 10:15): The shok of the lifting and the breast of the waving, on the fire-offerings of the fats shall they bring" — whereby we are taught that the fats were below.
Sifra Shemini Chapter 1
Tap any verse to see what it echoes — and start a chain or echo from it.