English · Shraga Silverstein6) (Vayikra 14:6) ("The living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar-wood, and the scarlet wool, and the hyssop, and he shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the slaughtered bird over the living water.") And whence is it derived that if the blood has been spilled, the bird for "sending" is to be allowed to die (and two new birds brought), or that if the bird for "sending" died, the blood is to be spilled out (and two new birds brought)? From "the living bird … and he shall dip them in the blood of the slaughtered bird" (whence it is derived that the two birds are mutually indispensable). "he shall take it": We are hereby taught that he separates it by itself. "and the cedar-wood and the scarlet-wool, and the hyssop": (they, too, [bound] by themselves). "and he shall dip": What is the intent of this? (i.e., why add "them and the living bird" instead of simply stating "and he shall dip in the blood of the slaughtered bird," and I would know that it refers to all of the aforementioned?) For I might think that since it (the living bird) was not together with them for binding, it should not be together with them for dipping; it must, therefore, be written "and he shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the slaughtered bird." The (living) bird was "returned" for dipping.