Kommentar zu Wajikra 17:4

דם יחשב BLOOD SHALL BE IMPUTED [UNTO THAN MAN] — As though he had shed the blood of a human being, who is guilty of a deadly sin.

BLOOD SHALL BE IMPUTED UNTO THAT MAN. This means that [his guilt is as] of the time of Creation.¹⁶⁴Ramban’s intention is as follows. At the time of Creation the slaughtering of any living creature as food was forbidden (see Ramban on Genesis 1:29, Vol. I, pp. 56-58). Only after the flood was the killing of animals permitted (ibid., 9:5, pp. 134-135). Hence the meaning of the verse here is that if one slaughters an animal outside the camp, then since it is forbidden to him as food, it shall be imputed to him as if he is guilty of bloodshed “as at the time of Creation.” See also Ramban here on Verse 11. The verse is thus stating: “Now of all living creatures except man, I [the Eternal] have declared their blood to be as water, and their flesh as dung,¹⁶⁵Zephaniah 1:17. just as it is said [at the time of Noah], as the green herb I have given you all.¹⁶⁶Genesis 9:3. But if one slaughters an animal outside the camp, then [since it is forbidden to be eaten], it shall be imputed to him as if he had shed blood [of a fellow man].”

דם יחשב, as if the relationship of man to the animals were as it had been before the deluge when it had been forbidden to kill animals as food.

דם יחשב לאיש ההוא דם שפך, the person is guilty of death at the hands of heaven, in return for the blood of the animal he had spilled outside the holy precincts. [at that time in the desert, killing an animal for food unless as a sacrifice was equivalent to shedding innocent blood. Ed.]

דם שפך, “it is considered bloodshed.” Seeing that the Torah had said in Genesis 9,3 כירק עשב נתתי לכם את כל לאכלה, “I have allocated it to you as food, like the grass of the field,” and had thereby permitted Noach and mankind to kill living creatures to use as food, excepting man, i.e. cannibalism, the Torah here adds –for the Israelites- that unless we observe the rules laid down for eating meat the whole procedure turns into murder, into wanton killing. In that event, we must consider the situation as if the prohibition to eat meat which was in effect before the deluge had been reinstated.

דם יחשב לאיש ההוא, דם שפך, “it will be considered as bloodshed for that man, he has shed (innocent) blood.” The severity of this legislation must be viewed against a background of ante-diluvial times. Before the deluge the lives of the animals were sacrosanct, i.e. man was not allowed to eat meat, only fruit and vegetables; we know this from Genesis 1,29: “here I have given you all herbage yielding seed that is on the surface of the entire earth, and every tree that has seed-yielding fruit; it shall be yours for food.” When, in the wake of man’s general corruption, the animals became corrupt also, and were saved from the deluge by Noach, man acquired the right to eat meat. This is why we need a prohibition here that such animals unless they had first been designated as sacrifices and been slaughtered as such, are prohibited to the Jewish people on pain of the karet penalty. Seeing that animal sacrifice substitutes for man’s dying for his sins, if such an animal has been killed for secular consumption, it is considered as if the killer had killed a human being. The status of the Israelites in the desert had much in common with the status of Adam in Gan Eden before the sin so that slaughtering an ox was similar to killing a human being (Isaiah 66,3, and Nachmanides on verse 11 in our chapter).

As one who shed the blood. I.e., it is as if it said, “It shall be considered [for that person] as blood of a person.” Because if not, would we not know that it is considered bloodshed [of an animal] when a person spills blood during the slaughtering.

ואל פתח אהל מועד לא הביאו, “and he had not first brought it to the entrance of the Tent of meeting;” as long as Moses had not erected the Tabernacle, slaughtering of animals could be done anywhere, (compare Tanchuma on this portion, section 10) as we find in fact when the Torah described in Exodus 24,5: וישלח את נערי בני ישאל ויעלו עולות, “and Moses sent the young men of Israel, and they offered burnt offerings.”As soon as the Tabernacle had been erected and became functional, the people were warned not to offer any sacrifices of animals that had not first been brought to the entrance of the Tabernacle first and been approved. דם יחשב, “it will be considered as if he had shed innocent blood;” the Torah speaks here of slaughtering animals for profane use, just eating their meat, and it wishes to warn people not to consider the slaughter of animals as an act of worshipping idols, as will be explained forthwith, (verse 7) when it continues with: ולא יזבחו עוד את זבחיהם לשעירים, “and they shall no more sacrifice their sacrifices to the satyrs.” The Jewish people had been deeply involved in idolatrous practices. The Torah now commands that when the time comes when they will use animals for profane purposes, this must be just that, without a tinge of idolatry.

דם שפך HE HATH SHED BLOOD — These apparently redundant words are intended to include in the penalty of כרת him who sprinkles outside the fore-court the blood of a sacrifice which has been slaughtered within it as is here commanded (Sanhedrin 34b; Zevachim 107a).

דם שפך ונכרת, “such a man has shed blood and he will be erased, etc.” The reason why this would be considered at least as serious an offence as murder, is that if that animal were not used for his own food, it should only have been killed as an offering to its Creator.

דם שפך ונכרת, so far we have only heard of the penalty; where did the Torah write the warning not to commit this offence? We find it in Deuteronomy 12,13: השמר לך פן תעלה עולותיך בכל מקום אשר תראה, “take heed not to offer your burnt offering in any place of your choosing.”