Sifra 9.0.18

Acharei Mot, Chapter 11

1) (Vayikra 17:13) ("And a man, a man, from the children of Israel and from the stranger that sojourns in their midst, that shall hunt a hunting of animal or bird that may be eaten — he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth.") "Israel": (the congregation of) Israel. "the stranger": proselytes; "that sojourns": to include the wives of proselytes; "in their midst": to include women and bondsmen. If so, why is a man, a man, mentioned? To include. For from "that shall hunt" I know only of hunting. Whence do I derive (the same for an animal that was) purchased, inherited, or received as a gift? From "a man, a man" (in any event).

2) "that shall hunt": This tells me only of "hunting" (literally). Whence do I derive the same for those which are already "hunted" and standing, such as geese and chickens? From "a hunting" — in any event. If so, why say "that shall hunt"? The Torah is hereby teaching proper conduct, that one should not eat flesh unless it is obtained thus adventitiously.

3) "bird": I might think that even an unclean bird is included; it is, therefore, written "animal." Just as an animal (carcass) renders garments tamei, so a bird which renders garments tamei — to exclude a bird that is unclean (for eating), which does not render garments tamei (viz. Chapter 12:7). — (Why don't we say, then:) Just as an animal is not (included) in (the mitzvah of) "Do not take the mother (while she is) on the young" (Devarim 22:6) — to exclude (from the mitzvah of covering the blood) a clean bird, which is (included) in (the mitzvah of) "Do not take the mother on the young"! It is, therefore, written "that shall be eaten" — to exclude an unclean bird, which may not be eaten.

4) This ("bird that may be eaten") tells me only of a bird. Whence do I derive (that this refers also to) an animal? From (the juxtaposition) "animal or bird that may be eaten." "animal" connotes any number of animals, whether many or few. "bird" connotes any number of birds, whether many or few — whence they ruled: If he slaughtered a hundred animals in one place, he may use one covering for all; a hundred birds in one place, he may use one covering for all. Animals and birds in one place, he may use one covering for all. R. Yehudah says: If he slaughtered an animal, he should cover (the blood) and then slaughter the bird, it being written "animal or bird that may be eaten." They said to him: But is it not already written (Devarim 22:14) "for the soul of all flesh, its blood is in its soul!"

5) "that may be eaten and he shall pour out": to exclude one's slaughtering and the animal's becoming carcass (neveilah) in his hand, or his stabbing or ripping (instead of slaughtering). "and he shall pour out": to include one's slaughtering for gentiles or for feeding to dogs, (for it is still subsumed in "it may be eaten").

6) One who slaughters an animal and finds it to be a treifah; one who slaughters an animal for idol worship; one who slaughters non-consecrated animals inside (the azarah) and consecrated animals outside; one who slaughters birds or animals that were to be stoned — R. Meir rules him liable (for covering the blood), it being written "and he shall pour out … and he shall cover." The sages say: (It is written) "that may be eaten and he shall pour out and he shall cover" — With shechitah which renders the animal kosher for eating he is liable for covering (of the blood), and with that which does not render the animal kosher for eating, he is not liable for covering (of the blood).

7) "and he shall pour out … and he shall cover": With what he slaughtered (i.e., with his hand or with his knife), he shall cover. Whence is it derived (that if he did not cover it), others, too, are required to do so? From (Devarim 22:14) "For the life of all flesh, its blood is in its soul, and I have said to the children of Israel, etc."

8) "And he shall pour … and he shall cover": It is a mitzvah for him to cover it, (but) if he covered it and it became uncovered, he is not required to cover it. If the wind covered it (and it became uncovered), he is required to cover it.

9) "its blood and cover it": We are hereby taught that he must cover all of its blood — whence it was ruled: Blood which splashes forth (at slaughtering) and that upon the blade must be covered. R. Yehudah said: When is this so? When there is no blood beside that (which can be covered); but if there is, he need not cover it.

10) "and he shall cover it": I might think that he could cover it with vessels; it is, therefore, written "with earth." This tells me only of earth. Whence do I derive (for inclusion) crushed stone, crushed earthenware, thin scraps of flax, thin wood shavings, thin fertilizer, thin sand, lime, clay-ground, ground bricks, and crushed sealing-clay? From "and he shall cover it."

10) If "and he shall cover it," I might think (to include) ground metal vessels, and flour, and bran-flour, and coarse bran; it is, therefore, written "with earth." Why do you see fit to include the first and to exclude the others? After Scripture includes, it excludes. I include the first, which are similar to earth, and I exclude the others, which are not similar to it.

11) And this generalization is indeed needed. For R. Shimon b. Gamliel would have it: Just as earth is distinctive in producing growths and serving for the covering (of blood), so, all (are permitted) for covering, which do the same — to exclude from covering, those things which do not produce growths.

12) (Vayikra 17:14) "For the soul of all flesh, its blood is its soul." This is the underlying reason (for what precedes). (Vayikra 17:14) "And I said to the children of Israel: The blood of all flesh you shall not eat.": to exhort adults vis-à-vis minors. (See Section 7:6 and Vayikra 17:7)