Sifra
Vayikra Dibbura DeNedavah, Chapter 9
Vayikra Dibbura DeNedavah, Chapter 9
1) (Vayikra 1:16): "And he shall cast it" (the crop, etc.): "it" — that of a kasher offering, and not that of a pasul offering; "it" — not (that of) a bird sin-offering, (whose crop the Cohein may eat if he so wishes). "it" is cast (in the place of the ashes), and not the (corresponding parts of the) burnt-offering of a beast, (which are rinsed and sacrificed).
2) For (in the absence of "it"), I would reason: Is it not a kal vachomer (that these parts in a beast should be pasul), viz.: If in an instance (that of a bird) where the skin is permitted (for the altar), the crop is pasul, in the instance (that of a beast), where the skin is pasul, how much more so should the crop be pasul! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "it" — it (that of a bird burnt-offering) is to be cast, and not that of a beast.
3) (Vayikra 1:16): "etzel the altar" — near the altar; "kedmah" — to the east of the ramp; "in the place of the ashes" — where the ashes were deposited. R. Chaninah says: There were two ash depositories, one in the east of the ramp and one in the east of the altar. In the first were placed the crops of birds and the ashes of the inner altar and of the menorah; and in the second were burned the p'sulin of higher-order offerings and (those of) the devoted portions of lower-order offerings.
4) (Vayikra 1:16): "And he shall rend it" — one that is kasher and not one that is pasul (i.e., If he performed melikah outside the prescribed time, he does not remove it from the altar, but sacrifices it without rending.) "it" required rending, but not a beast burnt-offering. For (in the absence of "it") I would reason: Is it not a kal vachomer, viz.: If a bird burnt-offering, which does not require flaying, requires rending — a beast burnt-offering, which does require flaying, how much more so must it require rending! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "And he shall rend it" — it requires rending, but not a beast burnt-offering.
5) ("And he shall rend it) with its feathers" — This permits the skin (to which the feathers are attached). For (in the absence of "with its feathers") I would reason: If in an instance (that of a beast burnt-offering) where the crop, (which is foul), is permitted (to be sacrificed) — the skin, (which gives off a foul odor upon burning), is forbidden, here, where the crop is forbidden, how much more so should the skin be forbidden! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "with its feathers" — the skin is permitted.
6) ("And he shall rend it) but he shall not divide it." I might think that if he did divide it, it is pasul; it is, therefore, written: "and (including an instance in which it was divided), he shall smoke." If "and he shall smoke," I might think (it is sacrificed) even if he performed melikah with a knife (instead of with his fingernail); it is, therefore, written: ("and he shall smoke) it." Why do you see fit to make it kasher in the instance of dividing and to make it pasul in that of melikah? After Scripture includes, it excludes. Why do I make dividing kasher? Because it follows conciliation (by the blood). I make melikah (with a knife) pasul because it precedes conciliation.
7) ("It is) a burnt-offering" — even if he wrung out the blood of the body and not that of the head. — But perhaps (the intent is) even if he wrung out the blood of the head and not that of the body! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "It is a burnt-offering" (connoting the greater part of it). "a burnt-offering, a fire-offering, a savor, sweet, to the L–rd": "a burnt-offering" — to that end (i.e., he must have that intent); "a fire-offering" — to that end (i.e., to exclude charring it instead of burning its ashes); "a savor" — to that end (to exclude roasting it beforehand); "sweet" (nichoach) — to give pleasure (nachath ruach); "to the L–rd" — to the Creator of the world.