1 After their blood has been poured out. The law of Sacrilege docs not apply to their flesh (which is now permitted to the priests) but only to their sacrificial portions.
2 See Meil. i1.
s The sacrificial portions of Lesser Holy Things are forbidden under the law of Sacrilege, while their flesh is permitted.
4 The Sin-offering of a bird has no sacrificial portions; cf. above, 4*. s Although it is forbidden to eat them.
4 See Hull. i5. Only the older of the doves and the younger of the pigeons were valid. The doves became valid only when the plucking of the feathers no longer drew blood.
9 A principle deduced by rabbinical interpretation from the verse Lev. n**.
10 Cf. p. 333, n. 3. 'It is enough if the inferred law is as strict as that from which it was inferred.’ Cf. Nidd. 4*.
11 Sin-offerings which cannot be offered and yet may not otherwise be made use of, as, e.g., the Sin-offering set apart by a man who died before he could offer it.
with which transgression had been committed, or that had killed a man on the evidence of one witness or on the evidence of the owner,' or with an ox that had committed or suffered an unnatural crime, or that had been set apart [for idolatry] or that had been worshipped, or that was the hire [of a harlot ] or the price [of a dog],2 or that was cross-bred or terefah, or born from the side3 [of the mother-beast], they must be left to pasture until they suffer a blemish, when they must be sold, and with the price of the best among them an offering of that same kind4 shall be offered. If it was confused with unblemished unconsecrated beasts, the unconsecrated beasts must all be sold to them that need an offering of that same kind.
2. If consecrated beasts were confused with other consecrated beasts belonging to the like kind of offering, each may be offered on behalf of any of the owners. But if consecrated beasts were confused with other conse¬ crated beasts belonging to a different kind of offering,5 they must be left to pasture until they suffer a blemish, when they must be sold, and with the price of the best among them an offering of each of those two kinds must be offered, and the added cost let him lose from his own substance.6 If they were confused with a Firstling or with Tithe [of Cattle], they must be left to pasture until they suffer some blemish, when they may be eaten after the manner of the Firstling or of Tithe [of Cattle].7 All kinds of offer¬ ing may suffer confusion one with another excepting a Sin-offering with a Guilt-offering.8 3. If a Guilt-offering was confused with a Peace-offering they9 must be left to pasture until they suffer a blemish. R. Simeon says: They should both be slaughtered at the north side and eaten after the manner of that to which the more stringent rules apply. They said to him: They may not suffer consecrated things to become invalid. If pieces of the flesh [of one offering] were confused with pieces of the flesh [of other offerings], the Most Holy Things with Lesser Holy Things, or what must be eaten the same day with what may be eaten during two days, they must be eaten after the manner of that to which the more stringent rules apply.
4. If the members10 of a Sin-offering" were confused with the members of a Whole-offering, 12 R. Eliezer says: Let them [all] be put above [the Altar-fire]; and I may account the flesh of the Sin-offering above to be but wood.'3 But the Sages say: Let its appearance be spoilt and let it go to the place of burning.14 5. If the members [of Whole-offerings] were confused with the members of blemished beasts, R. Eliezer says: If the head of one of them had been 1 Though in these two cases the ox may not be stoned, it may not be used as an offering. To these and the following Lev. 2a1* is applied.
* See Deut. 23“; Tern. 6'~*. Cf. Zeb. 9f;:4*; Par. 2*.
5 Lev. 22” is interpreted as including only a natural birth.
e Of offering — Whole-offering, Sin-offering, &c. — which was confused with the invalid beasta.
s None of them may be offered since it will be unknown in which of the several manners the blood of each must be sprinkled; see above, 518.
6 Pes. 9*. If he sold one of them for 5 xut and one for 3 stua he must bring the two new offerings each of 5 zvz value, since he does not know which of the two he had intended for which offering. 7 See Tem. 3*.
* There is a possibility of confusion except between a Sin-offering and a Guilt-offering, since the latter are never other than rams or he-lambs, and Sin-offerings are never other than ewe-lambs or he-goats. 9 Some texts omit the following sentence.
19 Cf. Tam. 4* tor an account of the several members.
11 To be consumed by the priests. 11 To be burnt on the Altar.
And not as contributing to 'the odour of a sweet smell’.
t4 Where all invalid offerings are destroyed.
480 FIFTH DIVISION: KODASHIM offered,' the heads of all may be offered; if the legs of one of them had been offered, the iegs of all may be offered. But the Sages say: Even if ail the members save one had been offered, this must go to the place of burning.
6. If blood was mixed with water, yet had still the appearance of blood, it remains valid;J if it was mixed with wine, the wine is deemed to be but water; if it was mixed with the blood of a beast [that was unconsecrated] or of a wild animal, this is deemed to be but water. R. Judah says: Blood cannot render other blood invalid.
7. If it was mixed with the blood of invalid offerings, it must be poured out into the gutter; if with blood that issued after death,3 it must be poured out into the gutter (R. Eliezer declares it valid); yet if the priest had not bethought himself and had sprinkled it, it is valid.
8. If the blood of unblemished offerings was confused with the blood of blemished offerings, it must be poured out into the gutter. If bowls [con¬ taining the one kind of blood were confused] with bowls [containing the other kind], R. Eliezer says: If one was offered all may be offered. But the Sages say: Even if all of them were offered save one, this must be poured out into the gutter.
9. If blood that should be sprinkled below4 was confused with blood that should be sprinkled above, R. Eliezer says: Let it be sprinkled above, and what should have been sprinkled below but was sprinkled above I may deem to be but water; and it may be sprinkled afresh below. But the Sages say: It must be poured out into the gutter; yet if the priest had not be¬ thought himself and had sprinkled it, it is valid.
10. If blood that should be sprinkled once was confused5 with other blood that should be sprinkled once, each is sprinkled once. If what should be sprinkled four times was confused6 with what should be sprinkled four times, each is sprinkled four times. If what should be sprinkled four times was confused with what should be sprinkled once, R. Eliezer says: Let each be sprinkled four times. R. Joshua said: Let each be sprinkled but once. R. Eliezer said to him: Would he not transgress the law Thou shalt not diminish from it?7 R. Joshua answered: Would not the other trangress the law Thou shalt not add thereto?7 R. Eliezer said to him: The law Thou shalt not add applies only to the act in itself.8 R. Joshua said to him: The law Thou shalt not diminish applies also only to the act in itself.9 Moreover R. Joshua said: If thou sprinklest [more often than is prescribed] thou transgressest the law Thou shalt not add, and also thou performest an act [of transgression] with thine hand; whereas if thou sprinklest not, thou transgressest the law Thou shalt not diminish, but thou performest no act [of transgression] with thine hand.
11. If what should be sprinkled within [the Sanctuary] was confused with what should be sprinkled outside, they should both be poured out ' Before it was noticed that other members were confused with members of the Whole - offering.
2 For the prescribed sprinklings. 3 See above, p. 471, n. 4.
4 The red line. See above, p. 469, n. 8.
3 e.g. the blood of a Firstling with the blood of Tithe of Cattle.
* e.g. the blood of a Whole-offering with the blood of a Guilt-offering.
8 The sprinkling itself suffices; to sprinkle the one blood three times again is no trans¬ gression of ‘thou shalt not add thereto’ since it can be accounted to be but water.
9 Therefore there is no need to sprinkle more than the once.
into the gutter. If it was sprinkled outside and again sprinkled within, it remains valid. If it was sprinkled within and then again sprinkled outside, R. Akiba declares it invalid, but the Sages valid. R. Akiba says: Any blood [that should have been sprinkled outside] that is brought within the Sanctuary to make atonement is invalid. But the Sages say: Only the Sin-offering. R. Eliezer says: The Guilt-offering also, for it is written, As is the Sin-offering, so is the guilt offering.1 12. If the blood of a Sin-offering2 was received in two bowls, and one of them was taken outside [the Temple Court], that which remains inside is still valid. If one of them was taken within [the Sanctuary], R. Jose the Galilean declares that valid which is still outside [in the Temple Court], but the Sages declare it invalid.3 R. Jose the Galilean said: If, in the case where intention renders invalid ([as when there is intention to sprinkle blood] outside* [the Temple Court]), this does not after the like fashion5 render invalid the blood that remains, must we not infer, in the case where intention does not render invalid6 ([as when there is intention to sprinkle blood] inside [the Sanctuary]), that we must not treat that which remains7 in like fashion as that which enters in?8 If it was taken inside to make atonement, even if it has not made atonement,9 it becomes invalid. So R. Eliezer. R. Simeon says: [It does not become invalid] until it makes atonement.10 R. Judah says: If it was taken inside by error, it is invalid. If any blood was invalid and yet was sprinkled on the Altar, the frontlet” does not effect acceptance,” but only for [an offering that was afterward found to be] unclean; for the frontlet effects acceptance for [an offering that was afterward found to be] unclean, but it does not effect acceptance for aught taken out [from the Temple Court].
9. 1. The Altar makes holy whatsoever is prescribed as its due. R. Joshua says: Whatsoever is prescribed as the due of the [Altar-] fires, and goes up to them, may not come down again, for it is written, This is the Olah on the hearth upon the Altar:13 like as the Whole-offering that is prescribed as the due of the [Altar-]fires, if it goes up to them, may not come down again, so whatsoever is prescribed as the due of the [Altar-]fires, and goes up to them, may not come down again. Rabban Gamaliel says: Whatsoever is prescribed as the due of the Altar and goes up to it may not come down again, for it is written, This is the Whole-offering on the hearth upon the Altar: like as the Whole-offering that is prescribed as the due of the Altar, if it goes up to it may not come down again, so whatsoever is prescribed as the due of the Altar, and goes up to it, may not come down again. The words of Rabban Gamaliel differ from the words of R. Joshua only in what con¬ cerns the blood and the drink-offerings of which Rabban Gamaliel says: 1 Lev. 77.; Which was sprinkled on the four horns of the outer Altar.
J See R. Akiba and the Sages in the preceding paragraph. ♦ See above, 2.1, s i.e. in the proposition now put forward, when, if one bowl of the blood i* taken outside the Temple Court, the blood in the other bowl remains valid.
* For, if, while slaughtering, one had intention of sprinkling blood tin thin the Sanctuary, this does not render the offering invalid, as does intention to sprinkle it outside the Temple Court. t The second bowl of blood.
* Which is invalid. See R. Akiba and the Sages, above, par. 11.
* i.e. is still unaprinkled.
10 i.e. only after it is sprinkled within does it become invalid for sprinkling on the outer Altar. ” See Ex. 28”-*. 11 Pes. 7’.
** Lev. 6*. The word olah, a Whole-offering, can have the meaning 'that which goes up’.
482 FIFTH DIVISION: KODASHIM They may not come down again; but R. Joshua says: They may come down again. R. Simeon says: If the animal-offering was valid and the drink-offerings1 invalid, or if the drink-offerings were valid and the animal¬ offering invalid, or even if both were invalid, the animal-offering may not come down again, but the drink-offerings may come down again.
2. These, if they go up, may not come down again: what had remained overnight, or that had become unclean, or that had been taken out [of its proper place], or that had been slaughtered [by any that purposed an act] outside its proper time or outside its proper place, or whose blood had been received or tossed by any that were ineligible. R. Judah says: What was slaughtered by night, or whose blood was poured away, or whose blood flowed outside the Curtains2 — if it went up it must come down again. R. Simeon says: It need not come down again. For R. Simeon used to say: If aught [first] became invalid in the Temple, the Temple accepts it; if it did not [first] become invalid in the Temple, the Temple does not accept it.
3. These are they that did not [first] become invalid in the Temple: a beast3 that committed or suffered an unnatural crime, or that had been set apart [for idolatry], or that had been worshipped, or that was the hire [of a harlot ] or the price [of a dog], or that was cross-bred, or terefah, or born from the side [of the mother- beast], or that had a blemish. R. Akiba declares valid such as have a blemish. R. Hanina the Prefect of the Priests says: My father used to reject from the Altar such as had a blemish.
4. Like as what goes up may not come down again, so what comes down may not go up again. But if aught went up alive to the top of the Altar, it may come down again. A Whole-offering that went up alive to the top of the Altar may come down again. If it was slaughtered on the top of the Altar it should be flayed and cut up where it lies.
5. These are they which, if they have gone up, may come down again:4 the flesh of the Most Holy Things, the flesh of the Lesser Holy Things, the residue of the Omer,s the Two Loaves,6 the Shewbread,7 the residues of the Meal-offerings, and the Incense-offering.8 The wool on the heads of the lambs and the hair of the beard of the goats, and the bones and the sinews and the horns and the hoofs, if they were not severed, must also go up, for it is written, And the priest shall bum the whole on the Altar.9 If they were severed they did not go up, for it is written, And thou shall offer thy burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood.10 6. If aught burst off from upon the Altar it need not be put back; so, too, if a coal burst off from the Altar. If members of an animal-offering burst off from upon the Altar, and it was not yet midnight, they must be put back, and the law of Sacrilege11 applies to them; but after midnight they need not be put back, and the law of Sacrilege does not apply to them.
7. As the Altar makes holy what is prescribed as its due, so also does the Ramp. As the Altar and the Ramp make holy what is prescribed as their due, so also do the vessels [belonging to the Temple]. The vessels for liquids make holy the liquids, and the measures for dry wares make holy the dry wares. The vessels for liquids do not make dry wares holy nor do measures for dry wares make liquids holy. If the sacred vessels have holes 3 See above, 8*. 4 Since they are consumed by the priest* or the owner.
7 Lev. 244"*. * Which was destined for the Inner Altar only.
in them yet are still able to do the like of their work that they did while yet entire, they still make holy [what is contained therein]; otherwise they do not make it holy. And none of them can make holy [what is contained in them] unless they are within the Temple.
10. 1. What is offered more often than another precedes that other.1 The Daily Whole- offerings precede the Additional Offerings;2 the Addi¬ tional Offerings of the Sabbaths precede the Additional Offerings of the new moons; the Additional Offerings of the new moons precede the Addi¬ tional Offerings of the new year; for it is written, Ye shall offer these beside the burnt offering of the morning which is for a continual burnt offering. 3 2. What is more holy than another precedes that other.4 The blood of the Sin-offering precedes the blood of the Whole-offering, since it makes atonement; the members of a Whole-offering precede the sacrificial por¬ tions of the Sin-offering, since they are given wholly to the [Altar-] fires; the Sin-offering precedes the Guilt-offering, since its blood is sprinkled on the four horns and on the [Altar-]base; the Guilt-offering precedes the Thank-offering and the ram of the Nazirite, since it is of the Most Holy Things; the Thank-offering and the ram of the Nazirite precede the Peace¬ offering, since they are eaten the same day and require a Bread-offering; the Peace-offering precedes the Firstling since its blood requires a fourfold sprinkling and the laying on of hands and drink-offerings and the waving of the breast and the thigh.
3. The Firstling precedes the Tithe [of Cattle] since it is holy from the womb, and is eaten [only] by the priests; the Tithe [of Cattle] precedes the Bird-offerings, since it is an animal-offering, and its blood and its sacrificial portions are most holy.5 4. The Bird-offerings precede the Meal-offerings since they come within the class of blood [offerings]; the sinner’s Meal -offering6 precedes the freewill Meal-offering since it is offered for sin; the Sin-offering of a bird precedes the Whole- offering of a bird, and in like manner [it precedes the Whole-offering] when they set aside [the two birds] for an offering.7 5. All Sin-offerings enjoined in the Law precede the Guilt-offerings, excepting only the Guilt-offering of the leper,8 since this is offered to render him fit [to enter the Temple and to eat of Hallowed Things]. All Guilt- offerings enjoined in the Law are offered from among beasts two years old and must be two shekels in value, excepting only the Guilt-offering of the Nazirite9 and the Guilt-offering of the leper, which are offered from among beasts one year old, and need not be two shekels in value.
6. Like as these are first to be offered so are they first to be eaten. If there is a Peace-offering of the day before and a Peace-offering of the same day, that of the day before is first [to be eaten]. If there is a Peace-offering of the day before and a Sin-offering and a Guilt-offering of the same day, that of the day before is first [to be eaten]. So R. Meir. But the Sages say: The Sin-offering is first [to be eaten] since it is of the Most Holy Things.
7. And all of them the priests may cook for food after any fashion, and eat them roast, or seethed, or cooked, and put therein unconsecrated spices or Heave-offering spices.10 So R. Simeon. R. Meir says: They may not put therein Heave-offering spices lest they make the Heave-offering invalid.
1 Hor. 3*. 2 Offered on Sabbaths, new moons, and Festival-days.
3 Num, 28s3. 4 Hor. 3®. s i.e. they are put on the Altar. 6 Lev. 511.
FIFTH DIVISION: KODASHIM 8. R. Simeon said: If thou seest oil spread about in the Temple Court thou needest not to ask, What is it? It can be naught save the residue of the Meal-offering wafers of Israelites1 or the leper’s log of oil.2 If thou seest oil put on the [Altar-]fire, thou needest not to ask, What is it? It can be naught save the residue of the Meal-offering wafers of the priests3 or the Meal-offering of the anointed [High] Priest/ since oil is not offered as a Freewill-offering. R. Tarfon says: Oil is offered also as a Freewill-offering.
11. 1. If the blood of a Sin-offering was splashed on to a garment, it requires washing.5 Although Scripture speaks only of such [Sin-offerings] as are to be eaten6 (as it is written, In a holy place shall it be eaten) yet it is all one whether it is such as is to be eaten or [such that its blood must be] brought into the inner place: the garment requires washing, for it is written, [This i$] the late of the Sin-offering; the one law applies to all Sin-offerings alike.
2. If the blood of an invalid Sin-offering [was splashed on to a garment] it does not require washing, whether there was a time when the offering was valid, or no time when it was valid. What kind of offering had a time when it was valid? Such that had remained overnight, or that had become unclean, or that had been taken outside [the Temple Court]. What kind of offering had not a time when it was valid? Such that was slaughtered [by one that purposed an act] outside its proper time and outside its proper place, or such that the blood thereof was received or sprinkled in a manner that was invalid.
3. If it was splashed on to a garment from the neck [of the beast] it does not require washing; and if [it was splashed on to a garment] from the horn or the base [of the Altar] it does not require washing. If it was poured over the pavement and gathered up again [and splashed on to a garment] it does not require washing. That blood alone requires washing which has been received in a vessel and is suitable for sprinkling. If it was splashed on to the skin [of a beast] that has not yet been flayed, it does not require wash¬ ing; but if on skin that has been flayed, it requires washing. So R. Judah. R. Eliezer says: Even after it has been flayed it does not require washing. Only that place requires washing that has been splashed with the blood and that is such that it can contract uncleanness and that is fitted for washing.7 4. It is all one whether it is cloth or sackcloth or hide: they require washing in a holy place; so, too, the breaking of an earthenware vessel8 [must be] in a holy place, and the scouring and rinsing of a brazen vessel8 [must be] in a holy place. Herein greater stringency applies to the Sin- offering than to the [other] Most Holy Things.6 5. If the garment was taken outside the Curtains,10 it must be brought in again and washed in a holy place. If it became unclean outside the Curtains it must be rent11 and brought in again and washed in a holy place. If any earthenware vessel was taken outside the Curtains it must be brought 7 And not such that are rendered clean by scouring, like wood. * Lev. 6**.
4 Since for them such washing or breaking is not prescribed.
11 The rule (see Kel. a*; 3, 27“) for utensils or woven stuff which contract uncleanness is that they become clean again if they are broken or rent to such an extent that they become unable to serve their former function.
in again and broken in a holy place. If it contracted uncleanness outside the Curtains a hole must be made in it, and then it must be brought in again and broken in a holy place.
6. If a brazen vessel was taken outside the Curtains, it must be brought in again and scoured and rinsed in a holy place; if it contracted unclean¬ ness outside the Curtains, it must be reduced in size and brought in again and scoured and rinsed in a holy place.
7. It is all one whether a man had cooked therein or poured therein boiling water, or the Most Holy Things or the Lesser Holy Things: it requires scouring and rinsing. R. Simeon says: Because of the Lesser Holy Things a vessel does not require scouring and rinsing. R. Tarfon says: If a man cooked therein at the beginning of the Feast, he may cook therein1 throughout the Feast. But the Sages say: Only until the time prescribed for the eating [of the offering].2 [In] scouring and rinsing, the scouring [must be done] after the manner of the scouring of the cup;3 and the rinsing [must be done] after the manner of the rinsing of the cup;4 the scouring must be done with hot water, and the rinsing with cold water.5 The spit and the grill must be scalded6 with hot water.
8. If a man cooked therein Hallowed Things and unconsecrated things, or Most Holy Things and Lesser Holy Things, and there was [left from the more holy thing] enough to give a flavour, what is less holy must be eaten in the conditions prescribed for the more holy thing; but this does not render [the vessel] subject to scouring and rinsing, nor does it render other things invalid through contact. If one wafer touched another wafer [that was invalid], or if one piece of flesh [from an offering] touched another piece of flesh [that was invalid], the whole wafer or the whole piece of flesh does not become forbidden, but only the part that was overlapped.
12. 1. [A priest] that had immersed himself [because of uncleanness] the selfsame day,7 or whose atonement was yet incomplete,8 may have no share9 in the Hallowed Things to consume them in the evening. [A priest] that is mourning his near of kin may touch but he may not offer them or have any share10 in them to consume them in the evening. They that have a blemish,11 whether lasting or passing, may have a share in them12 and eat of them, but they may not offer them. And any [priest] on whom it did not fall to perform the [Altar-jservice may have no share in the flesh; and he that has no share in the flesh has no share in the hides. Even if he was unclean at the moment of sprinkling the blood but clean at the moment of burning the fat pieces, he may have no share in the flesh; for it is written, He among the sons of Aaron that offereth the blood of the peace offerings, and the fat, shall have the right thigh for a portion.12, 2. If the Altar has not acquired the right to the flesh of an offering14 the 1 Without washing or rinsing; since owing to the abundance of flesh of the Peace-offerings which a man cooks daily in his pot at that time each day’s cooking serves to clean away the remnants of the previous day’s Peace-offering before it can fall within the category of ‘Remnant’ (see above, p. 471, n. 10).
3 i.e. after he had eaten of an offering he must rinse and scour his pots not later than two days and a night after cooking Peace-offerings, or a day and a night after cooking Sin- offerings.
3 Used in saying the Benediction over food; this needed to be washed and scoured inside and out. 4 On the outer side.
5 Some texts read: both scouring and rinsing must be done with cold water.
13 Lev. 733.;4 i.e. before the sprinkling of the blood.
FIFTH DIVISION: KODASHIM priests have not acquired the right to its hide, for it is written, A man’s whole offering 1 — a Whole-offering that has been offered up2 for a man. If a Whole-offering was slaughtered under some other name, although it does not count to its owner [in fulfilment of his obligation]3 its hide belongs to the priests. It is all one whether it was the Whole-offering brought by a man or the Whole-offering brought by a woman, the hide thereof belongs to the priests.
3. The hides of the Lesser Holy Things belong to their owners, and the hides of the Most Holy Things belong to the priests. It is an inference from the less to the greater: if in the Whole-offering (to whose flesh they have no right) they yet have the right to the hide, how much more, therefore, in the Most Holy Things (to whose flesh they have the right) have they the right to their hide! The Altar affords no proof4 since the hide never pertains to it.
4. If aught befell any of the Hallowed Things to render them invalid before they were flayed, their hides do not belong to the priests; but if it befell after they were flayed, their hides belong to the priests. R. Hanina the Prefect of the Priests said:5 Never have I seen a hide taken out to the place of burning. R. Akiba said: We learn from his words that if a man flayed a Firstling and it was found to be terefah, the priests may make use of its hide.6 But the Sages say: ‘We have not seen’ affords no proof; but, rather, it must be taken out to the place of burning.
5. If the bullocks which are to be burnt and the he-goats which are to be burnt7 are burnt according to the prescribed rite, they are burnt in the place of ashes8 and they convey uncleanness to garments;9 but if they are not burnt according to the prescribed rite,10 they are burnt in the Beth Birah,11 and they do not convey uncleanness to garments.