Midrasch zu Dewarim 12:78

There was an incident involving Doeg ben Yosef who died and left a young son to his mother. She would measure him in handbreadths and donate his weight in gold to the Temple¹⁸²Literally, to Heaven. each and every year. When the siege encircled Jerusalem, his mother slaughterd him with her own hands and ate him: Jeremiah was lamenting before the Omnipresent and saying: “Shall women eat their fruit, the infants of their nurturing?” (Lamentations 2:20). The Divine Spirit responded to him: “Shall the priest and the prophet be slain in the Temple of the Lord?” (Lamentations 2:20). This is Zekharya ben Yehoyada.¹⁸³See Eikha Rabba, Prologue, 23.
Another matter, “for these I weep,” Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya, Rabbi Yehuda says: For the departure of intelligence and for the departure of the Divine Presence. Is it possible that Zedekiah saw others plucking out his eyes and he did not have the intelligence to smash his head against the wall until his soul departed, but he rather caused his sons to be slaughtered before his eyes?¹⁸⁴Nebuchadnezzar had Zedekiah’s sons slaughtered before his eyes, and then had Zedekiah’s eyes blinded (II Kings 25:7). According to the Sages, they first inserted iron rods into his eyes but had not yet blinded him; they finished blinding him only after he saw his sons slaughtered (Tanḥuma, Vaetḥanan 1). The midrash here asks why Zedekiah did not kill himself to spare himself this torture. Rather, regarding that moment it is stated: “The heart of the king and the heart of the princes will fail…” (Jeremiah 4:9). Rabbi Neḥemya said: For the departure of priesthood and kingship. That is what is written: “These are the two anointed men who attend the Lord of all the land” (Zechariah 4:14); these are Aaron and David. Aaron is demanding his priesthood and David is demanding his kingdom.
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: For dereliction in the study of Torah.¹⁸⁵This opinions interprets the verse “for these I weep” to mean due to these sins, namely the dereliction in the study of Torah. That is what is written: “These are the statutes and the ordinances” (Deuteronomy 12:1).¹⁸⁶This verse is stated regarding the Torah. The word “these” in Lamentations is thus connected to the words of Torah, referred to as “these” in Deuteronomy. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: For idol worship. That is what is written: “These are your gods, Israel” (Exodus 32:4). Zavdi ben Levi said: For the abrogation of the offerings. That is what is written: “These you shall perform to the Lord on your appointed days” (Numbers 29:39). The Rabbis said: For the abrogation of the [non-priestly] watches.¹⁸⁷The reference is to the groups of Israelites, corresponding to the twenty-four priestly watches, who would spend the week in prayer and Torah study so that the Temple service would be pleasing to God; see Taanit 26a. What benefit does the world have from the watches? On Monday they would fast on behalf of the seafarers. On Tuesday they would fast on behalf of the wayfarers. On Wednesday they would fast on behalf of the children, so that diphtheria would not afflict their mouths and cause them to die. On Thursday they would fast on behalf of the pregnant women, that they would not miscarry, and on behalf of the nursing women, that their children should not die. But is it not so that one may not fast on behalf of two matters simultaneously, as it is written: “We fasted and we requested from our God about this”? (Ezra 8:23). And a verse in Daniel says: “For them to request mercy from before the God of heaven regarding this secret” (Daniel 2:18), and not regarding two.¹⁸⁸Both verses mention requesting from God regarding “this,” in singular. Rather, it is like that which Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: For drought and exile one fasts for both of them simultaneously.¹⁸⁹They are related, because due to famine people wander from their homes in search of food. Similarly, miscarriage and the death of infants are closely enough related that one can pray regarding both simultaneously. However, one does not fast on the day before Shabbat or on the day following Shabbat, in deference to Shabbat.
“My eye, my eye sheds water.” Rabbi Levi said: This is analogous to a doctor who had pain in one eye. He said: ‘Let my eye weep for my eye.’ So too, Israel is called the eye of the Holy One blessed be He. That is what is written: “For the eye of man and all the tribes of Israel is toward the Lord” (Zechariah 9:1). As it were, the Holy One blessed be He said: ‘Let My eye weep for My eye.’
“For a comforter, restorer of my soul, has grown distant from me.” What is the name of the messianic king? Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: The Lord is his name, as it is stated: “This is his name that they will call him: The Lord is our righteousness” (Jeremiah 23:6). As Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: It is good for a province when its name is like that of its king, and the name of its king is like that of its God. It is good for a province when its name is like that of its king, as it is written: “The name of the city from that day shall be: The Lord is there” (Ezekiel 48:35). The name of its king like the name of its God, as it is stated: “This is his name that they will call him: The Lord is our righteousness” (Jeremiah 23:6).
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: His name is Tzemaḥ, as it is stated: “Behold a man, Tzemaḥ is his name, and he will sprout [yitzmaḥ]” (Zechariah 6:12). Rabbi Yudan said: Menaḥem is his name, as it is stated: “For a comforter [menaḥem]…has grown distant from me.” Rabbi Ḥanina said: And they do not disagree; the numerical value of this equals the numerical value of that, Menaḥem equals Tzemaḥ.¹⁹⁰Menaḥem: mem – 40, nun – 50, ḥet – 8, mem – 40 = 138. Tzemaḥ: tzadi – 90, mem – 40, ḥet – 8 = 138. The following supports that [statement] of Rabbi Yudan in the name of Rabbi Aivu: There was an incident involving a certain person who was plowing. One of his oxen lowed. A certain Arab passed near him and said to him: ‘What are you?’ He said to him: ‘I am a Jew.’ He said to him: ‘Unharness your ox, untie your plow.’ He said to him: ‘Why?’ He said to him: ‘The Temple of the Jews is destroyed.’¹⁹¹Therefore, you should mourn rather than work your field. He said to him: ‘How do you know?’ He said to him: ‘I know it from the lowing of your ox.’ While he was still conversing with him, it lowed again. He said to him: ‘Harness your ox, tie your plow, as the redeemer of the Jews was born.’ He said to him: ‘What is his name?’ He said to him: ‘His name is Menaḥem.’ ‘What is his father’s name?’ He said to him: ‘Hezekiah.’ He said to him: ‘Where do they live?’ He said to him: ‘In Birat Arva, that is in Bethlehem of Judah.’ That man sold his oxen, sold his plow, and became a seller of felt garments for children. He would enter a city and leave a city, enter a province and leave a province, until he arrived there.
All of the women of the village came to purchase from him, but the mother of a certain child did not purchase from him. He said to her: ‘Why are you not purchasing children’s garments of felt?’ She said to him: ‘Because my child has a harsh fate.’ He said to her: ‘Why?’ She said to him: ‘Because upon his arrival, the Temple was destroyed.’¹⁹²The Temple was destroyed on the day he was born. He said to her: ‘We rely on the Master of the universe that upon his arrival it was destroyed and upon his arrival it will be rebuilt.’ He said to her: ‘Take one of these felt garments for your child, I will come some time later to your house and collect your payment.’ She took it and she went. Some time later that man said: ‘I will go and see how that child is doing.’ He came to her, he said to her: ‘How is the child doing?’ She said to him: ‘Did I not say to you that he has a harsh fate? Even upon his arrival there was a foreboding omen. Since that time, winds and storms carried him away.’ He said to her: ‘Did I not tell you that upon his arrival it was destroyed and upon his arrival it will be rebuilt?’¹⁹³He was carried away by the wind because he is destined to serve a purpose in a supernatural manner, and bring about the building of the Temple.
Rabbi Avun said: Why must I learn this from Arabs, is it not an explicit verse? As it is written: “The Lebanon will fall by a mighty one” (Isaiah 10:34), and it is written immediately thereafter: “A branch will emerge from the trunk of Yishai and a shoot will sprout from his roots” (Isaiah 11:1).
The school of Rabbi Sheila said: Shilo is the name of Messiah, as it is stated: “Until Shilo will come” (Genesis 49:10); Sheila is written.¹⁹⁴The word Shilo in the verse is spelled with a heh at the end rather than a vav, such that it can also be read Sheila. This was stated by Rabbi Sheila’s students, who felt that if their generation was worthy, their mentor would be the messiah (Etz Yosef). The school of Rabbi Ḥanina said: Ḥanina is his name, as it is stated: “As I will not grant you clemency [ḥanina]” (Jeremiah 16:13). The school of Rabbi Yanai said: Yinon is his name, as it is written: “May his name be praised [yinon] as long as the sun shines” (Psalms 72:17). Rabbi Beivai of Sanegurya said: His name is Nehira, as it is stated: “Light [nehora] rests with Him” (Daniel 2:22), nehira is written. Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel ben Rabbi Yitzḥak: If the messianic king is from the living, his name is David, and if he is from the dead, his name is David. Rabbi Tanḥuma said: I will say his source: “He increases deliverance to His king, shows kindness to His anointed, [to David and to his descendants, eternally]” (Psalms 18:51). “And to David” is not written here, but rather “to David and his descendants.”¹⁹⁵The verse says: To His anointed [meshiḥo], to David, identifying David as the messiah.
“My children have become desolate, because the enemy has prevailed.” Rabbi Aivu said: Like that shell of the gourd; the more [the shell] grows, the smaller [the fruit] is.¹⁹⁶The greater the percentage of the total fruit is shell, the smaller the edible fruit is (Arukh). The point is that the greater the success of the enemy, the greater the desolation of Israel. Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: Like this pig; the more that its offspring grow, the smaller it gets.¹⁹⁷Its energy is sapped by nursing its young (Matnot Kehuna).

... Teach us, our master, from when does the mitzvah of the Channukah lamp begin? Our rabbis taught – from when the sun sets until the majority of people are gone from the marketplace. And where are they to be lit? If one lives on an upper floor with a window facing the public domain, light there. If it is a time of danger, light within your house [and it is forbidden to do work by its light. R’ Asi said] it is forbidden to see by its light. Why do we light Channukah lamps? When the Hasmonean High Priest defeated the Greeks, as it says “For I bend Judah for Me like a bow; I filled [the hand of] Ephraim, and I will arouse your children, O Zion, upon your children, O Javan; and I will make you as the sword of a mighty man,” (Zechariah 9:13) they entered the Holy Temple. They found there eight iron stakes, fixed them in the ground and lit lamps upon them. Why do we read the Hallel psalms of praise? Because it is written “The Lord is God, and He gave us light.” (Tehillim 118:27) Why don’t we read it on Purim? It is written “…to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish the entire host of every people and province that oppress them…” (Esther 8:11) and we don’t read it except to mark the fall of a kingdom and the kingdom of Ahasuerus still stood. But when the Holy One destroyed the kingdom of Greece they began to sing hymns and praises and to say that in the past we were servants to Pharoah, servants to Greece and now we are servants to the Holy One “Praise, you servants of the Lord…” (Tehillim 113:1) How many channukot (dedications) were there? There were seven. The dedication of heaven and earth, as it says “Now the heavens and the earth were completed…” (Bereshit 2:1) What dedication was there then? “And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to shed light upon the earth.” (Bereshit 1:17) The dedication of the wall, as it says “And in the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem…” (Nechemiah 12:27) The dedication of those who came up from the exile, as it says “And they offered up for the dedication of this House of God…” (Ezra 6:17) The dedication of the priests, which we light for. The dedication of the world to come, as it says “And it shall come to pass on that day, that I will search Jerusalem with candles…” (Tzephaniah 1:12) The dedication of the princes “This was the dedication offering of the altar…” (Bamidbar 7:84) The dedication of the Sanctuary, which this is speaking of “A psalm; a song of dedication of the House, of David.” (Tehillim 30:1) Another explanation. There are seven channukot. The dedication of the creation of the world, as it is written “Now the heavens and the earth were completed…” (Bereshit 2:1) Completion is the language of dedication, as is written “All the work of the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting was completed…” (Shemot 39:32) The dedication of Moshe, as it is written “And it was that on the day that Moses finished erecting the Mishkan…” (Bamidbar 7:1) The dedication of the House, as it is written “A psalm; a song of dedication of the House, of David.” (Tehillim 30:1) The dedication of the Second Temple [as it says “And they offered up for the dedication of this House of God…” (Ezra 6:17) and the dedication of the wall] as it says “And in the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem…” (Nechemiah 12:27) The current one of the House of Hasmonean. The dedication of the world to come, because even that has lights, as it is written “And the light of the moon shall be like the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be seven-fold as the light of the seven days…” (Isaiah 30:26)

(Exodus 13:2) "in man and beast he is Mine": Whatever obtains with the man obtains with his beast. This excludes (from the law of bechor) the Levites, i.e., since it does not obtain with the man, it does not obtain with his beast. Variantly: The bechor of a man is likened to the bechor of a beast, and the bechor of a beast to the bechor of a man. Just as with a beast, a miscarriage (of the first pregnancy) exempts (the second fetus) from (the law of) the bechor, so, with men. And just as with the bechor of a man, one may give it to the Cohein wherever he wishes, so, with the bechor of a beast. From (Devarim 12:6) "And you shall bring there (to the Temple) your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices, etc.", I might think that even if he was far away he must bring it (his first-born) to the Temple. It is, therefore, written "in man and beast he is Mine." The bechor of a man is hereby likened to the bechor of a beast. Just as the latter may be given to a Cohein wherever he wishes, so, the former. And just as the bechor of a man must be cared for for thirty days (before being given to the Cohein), so, the bechor of a beast.

If Israel had been meritorious, then in eleven days they would have entered Eretz Yisrael, but because they corrupted their ways, the L-rd stretched it into forty years, as it is written (Bamidbar 14:34) "According to the number of days that you spied out the land, forty days — a day for a year, a day for a year — shall you bear your sins." R. Yehudah says: Now did it take them eleven days? Did it not take them only three days? As it is written (Ibid. 10:33) "And they traveled from the mountain of the L-rd a journey of three days." (The intent is that) in three days Israel traveled an eleven-day distance. If Israel had been meritorious, they would have entered Eretz Yisrael in three days. As it is written (Ibid.) "And the ark of the covenant of the L-rd preceded them, a distance of three days to look out a resting place for them," "a resting place" being Eretz Yisrael, as it is written (Devarim 12:9) "For you will not yet have come to the rest and to the inheritance that the L-rd your G-d gives you." They said to him: Was it an eleven-day distance? Was it not a forty-day distance, as it is written of Eliyahu (I Kings 19:8) "And he arose and ate and drank, and he walked on the strength of that meal for forty days and forty nights (until the mountain of G-d, Chorev")? … R. B'na'ah says: If Israel had been meritorious, they would have entered Eretz Yisrael in one day, as it is written (Shemoth 13:4-5) "This day you go out, in the month of spring," immediately (followed by) "And it shall be, when the L-rd brings you to the land of Canaan." Abba Yossi b. Chanan says in the name of Cohein Bardela: If Israel had been meritorious, as soon as their horses' hooves ascended from the sea, they would have entered Eretz Yisrael, as it is written (Devarim 1:21) "Go up (from the sea) and possess (the land) as the L-rd, the G-d of your fathers has spoken to you."

R. Jose said: "All that is said in the chaptor (I Sam. 8) concerning a king, the king is allowed to do." R. Juda, however, said: "The whole portion is said merely to frighten them, as the expression, to set a king over thee — i.e., that the fear of the king shall always be upon you." And thus R. Juda used to say: "There are three positive commandments which Israel was commanded at the time they entered Palestine, viz.: They shall appoint a king; they shall destroy the descendants of Amalek; and they shall build a Temple." R. N'hurai says: "The whole portion was said only because they murmured against Samuel, requesting a king, as it is said (Ib., ib. 14) And thou sayest, I wish to set a king over me," etc. We are taught in a Baraitha: R. Eliezer says: "The elders of that generation rightly asked Samuel for a king, as it is said (I Sam. 8, 5) Appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations. But the commoners who were among them perverted the statement, as it is said (Ib., ib. 20) That we also may ourselves be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles." We are taught in another Baraitha: R. Jose says: "Israel was commanded three positive commandments when they entered Palestine, viz.: They shall appoint a king; they shall destroy the descendants of Amalek; and they shall build a Temple. But it was not known which was the first. However, from (Ex. 17, 16) And he said. Because the Lord hath sworn on his throne that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation, it is to be inferred that the commandment relating to the king was first, because the word kissei implies nothing else but a king, as it is said (I Chr. 29, 23) Then sat Solomon on kissei {the throne) of the Lord as king. Still it was yet unknown which should be first, the destruction of the descendants of Amalek or the building of the Temple. But when the passage says (Deut. 12, 10) He will give you rest from all your enemies … and then shall it be that the place, etc., it is to be inferred that the cutting off of the nation of Amalek was to be first. And so was it with David, as it is said (II Sam. 7, 1) And it came to pass, when the king dwelt in his house, and the Lord had given him rest, etc., That the king said to Nathan the prophet, see now, I dwell in a house of cedar," etc.

2) Or go in this direction. It is written here "terumah," and, in respect to bikkurim (first-fruits) "terumah" (Devarim 12:17). Just as "terumah" of bikkurim has no limit, this, too, has no limit!

2) "and you shall say to them: For a dead body (nefesh) he may not become tamei among his people.": This tells me only of the dead body. Whence do I derive (for inclusion) the blood? It is, therefore, written "for a nefesh," and elsewhere (Devarim 12:23) it is written "for the blood is the nefesh."

2) I might think (that he could bring them) on any festival that he desired. It is, therefore, written (Devarim 12:5-6) "And you shall come there (to the Temple) and you shall bring there" (the same). If to permit, it had already been permitted. If to make mandatory, it has already been made mandatory. If so, why is it written? (To make it mandatory for him to bring them) on the first festival (of the three festivals) that arrives (after they were due).

(Deut. 12:29:) WHEN THE LORD GOD HAS CUT OFF THE GENTILES. A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To a king who planted a vineyard within his field, but within <that field> were great cedars and thorns.⁵Tanh., Deut. 4:9. The king went and cut down the cedars and left the thorns. His servants said to him: Our Lord King, the thorns, which catch our clothes, you have left <standing>; but you have cut down the cedars! He said to them: If I had left the cedars and cut down the thornbushes, how should I have {decreed} [fenced in] my vineyard. So also Israel is the vineyard of the Holy One, as stated (in Is. 5:7): FOR THE VINEYARD OF THE LORD OF HOSTS IS THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL. He brought Israel into the land and cut down the cedars that were in it, as stated (in Amos 2:9): YET I DESTROYED THE AMORITES [BEFORE YOU, WHOSE STATURE WAS LIKE THE CEDARS IN HEIGHT]; but he left their children and their children's children so that Israel would observe the Torah, as stated (in Jud. 3:1): NOW THESE ARE THE NATIONS WHICH THE LORD LEFT TO TEST ISRAEL. So when the vineyard stands in its place in the service of the Torah, THEN (according to Is. 33:12) THE PEOPLES SHALL BECOME BURNINGS OF LIME, THORNS CUT DOWN <THAT ARE BURNED IN THE FIRE>. It is also written (in Is. 40:17): ALL THE NATIONS ARE AS NOTHING BEFORE HIM. Look at how many hosts⁶Gk.: ochloi. Pharaoh sent out after Israel! When Israel saw them, they were terrified before them and said: Who can stand against these? The Holy One said to them: By your lives, all these are as unimportant before me as <if they were> [only] a single horse, as stated (in Exod. 15:19): WHEN THE HORSE (in the singular) OF PHARAOH CAME; they all died in a single breath (rt.: NShP), as stated (in Exod. 15:10): YOU BLEW (rt.: NShP) WITH YOUR WIND, <AND THE SEA COVERED THEM>. Similarly Gog and Magog are going to come against Israel, but the Holy One will carry out judgments against them (literally: against him), as stated (in Ezek. 38:22): I WILL ENTER INTO JUDGMENT AGAINST HIM WITH PESTILENCE AND WITH BLOOD…. At that time (according to Ezek. 38:23): SO I WILL BE MAGNIFIED, BE SANCTIFIED, AND BE MADE KNOWN BEFORE THE EYES OF MANY {PEOPLES} [NATIONS]; AND THEY SHALL KNOW THAT I AM THE LORD.

MISHNA: All who are liable to Kareth if beaten, are exempt from it (Kareth), as it is said (Ib., ib. 3) Thy brother rendered vile, i.e., as soon as he was rendered vile, he is thy brother. This is the opinion of R. Chanania b. Gamaliel. R. Chanania b. Gamaliel remarked: "If the commiitting of a crime deprives one of his soul, how much more should a meritorious act save one's soul!" R. Ishmael said: "This may be inferred from the very place which treats of Kareth (Lev. 18, 29) Even the souls that commit them shall be cut off, and (Ib., ib. 5) [Ordinances, which, if a man do] he shall live in them. From this, it is to be inferred that if one only abstains from committing a crime, he is rewarded as if he acted meritoriously." R. Simon b. Rabbi said: "Concerning the passage (Deut. 12, 23) Be firm so as not to eat the blood; for the blood is the life. Now, if a person rejects blood which is disgusting to one, and abstains from it, is rewarded; how much more is one to be rewarded for abstaining from robbery and adultery towards which the nature of man is inclined; and not only he, but also all his descendants to the end of the generations, may be rewarded." R. Chanania b. Akashya said: "The Holy One, praised be He! wanted to make Israel blissful and therefore He multiplied to them his commands in the Torah, as it reads (Is. 42, 21) The Lord was pleased [to do this], for the sake of His righteousness: [therefore] He maketh the teaching great and glorious."

3) Until here (Vayikra 17:5) Scripture speaks of consecrations which were dedicated at the time that bamoth (temporary altars) were interdicted and he offered them outside (instead of within), their punishment being stated (to be kareth). Where is the exhortation against this? In (Devarim 12:13) "Take heed unto yourselves lest you offer up your burnt-offerings in every place that you see. (Devarim 12:14) "but in the place, etc."

3) Until here (Vayikra 17:5) Scripture speaks of consecrations which were dedicated at the time that bamoth (temporary altars) were interdicted and he offered them outside (instead of within), their punishment being stated (to be kareth). Where is the exhortation against this? In (Devarim 12:13) "Take heed unto yourselves lest you offer up your burnt-offerings in every place that you see. (Devarim 12:14) "but in the place, etc."

3) (Vayikra 6:19) ("The Cohein that offers it as a sin-offering shall eat it. In a holy lace shall it be eaten, in the court of the tent of meeting.") "The Cohein that offers it as a sin-offering shall eat it": with the exclusion of one who immersed in the daytime (and is not clean until the evening, and one lacking atonement, and a mourner. "it": a fit (offering) and not one that is unfit, (such as one that went out of the azarah or became tamei). "it": an offering whose blood was applied above (the upper half of the altar), and not one whose blood was applied below. — Now where are you coming from (to assume that it would be fit if its blood were placed below)? — Because it is written (Devarim 12:27): "And the blood of your sacrifices shall be spilled on the altar of the L–rd your G d, and the flesh you shall eat," I would assume that a sin-offering whose blood was applied on the lower half was fit. And how would I satisfy "on the horns of the altar"? As being a mitzvah (but not a categorical requirement). For I would think that just as it requires four applications (of blood on the horns of the altar), but if he made (only) one application it atones, so, it would require the application of blood above, but if he did so below it would be fit. And does this not follow, viz.: Blood is applied below (the red line, in the instance of a bird sin-offering, (Vayikra 5:9): "And he shall sprinkle from the blood of the sin-offering on the wall of the altar," which is expounded to be the lower wall), and blood is applied above (the red line, in the instance of beast sin-offering, where "horns" is written). Just as (it is derived by exegesis) that if what was to be applied below was applied above, there is no atonement, so, if what was to be applied above, was applied below, there is no atonement. But (this could be countered, viz.:) Why does the lower applied above not atone? Because none of it is to be offered up above. Would you then say (because of this) that the higher applied below does not atone — when part of it is offered below! (So that "it" is required to tell us that it does not atone.) — But this would be countered by the instance of the inner (blood), part of which is offered outside, notwithstanding which if it (the inner blood) was offered outside, it would not atone. (So, the question returns: Why is the "it" exclusion necessary?) (Because it could be countered) Why is it that if the inner blood is applied outside it does not atone? Because the inner altar does not complete the process of atonement, whereas with the higher blood, since the horns do complete the process of atonement, I would say that if it were placed below, it would be fit; it is, therefore, written (to negate this): "it" — an offering whose blood was applied above, and not one whose blood was applied below.

"When a person incurs guilt accidentally by [transgressing one among] all of the commandments of YHVH": This is that of which the Bible says: "And indeed I have witnessed under the sun the place of judgment..." (Ecclesiastes 3:16). Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua [in conversation]...

Alternatively, "when [the Lord] enlarges [your territory]" (Deuteronomy 20:12). "Let me exult and rejoice in Your loving-kindness when You notice my affliction, are mindful of my deep distress, and do not hand me over to my enemy, but grant me relief" (Psalms 31:8-9). The Rabbis say, this verse refers to Joseph. Joseph said, "Master of the universe, let me exult and rejoice in your loving-kindness that you have done for me. Had you [only] called Potiphar's wife to account for me, but not given me the powers of a sovereign, I would have been joyful and happy, now that you've also given me the powers of a sovereign, I will exult and rejoice in your loving-kindness." "When you notice my affliction", this [too] refers to Joseph, about whom it is written, "His feet were afflicted in fetters; an iron collar was put on his neck" (psalms 105:18). "and did not hand me over to my enemy" - this is Potiphar [who sought to imprison Joseph for life]. "but grant me relief", since he caused me to rule over the entire land of Egypt. From where is this derived? From the verse: "Now Joseph was the vizier of the land; it was he who dispensed rations to all the people of the land..." (Genesis 42:6). Alternatively "Let me exult and rejoice" is speaking about [the Children of] Israel. The Children of Israel said, "Master of the universe, let me exult and rejoice in your loving-kindness that you have done unto us, for had you [only] freed us from the Egyptians and not given us their money, we would have be gladdened, [but] what joy and happiness we have [now] that you have given us [also] their wealth. "when you notice my affliction" this refers to the Israelites about him it was written: "The Egyptians dealt harshly with us and oppressed us; they imposed heavy labor upon us. We cried to the LORD, the God of our fathers, and the LORD heard our plea and saw our affliction, our misery, and our oppression" (Deuteronomy 26:6-7). "are mindful of my deep distress" this refers to the Israelites, about whom it is written "they made life bitter for them" (Exodus 1:14). "and do not hand me over to my enemy" - this refers to the evil Pharaoh, as it is written "The foe said, “I will pursue"" (Exodus 15:9). "But grant me relief", that you widened our borders, as it says, "when [the Lord] enlarges [your territory]" (Deuteronomy 20:12).

... Another explanation. “When the Lord, your God, expands your boundary…” (Deuteronomy 12:20) The Rabbis say: this is speaking of Jerusalem. Who is able to see the calm of Jerusalem when the Holy One expands it? R’ Shimon bar Nachman says: to what is this to be compared? To a country, etc. “And then the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem shall be pleasant to the Lord, as in the days of old and former years.” (Malachi 3:4) “Lo, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord, that he may turn the heart of the fathers back through the children, and the heart of the children back through their fathers-lest I come and smite the earth with utter destruction.” (Malachi 3:23-24) Behold I send My angel and he will clear the way before Me. And suddenly the Master whom you desire will come into His palace and the angel of the covenant whom you desire, behold he is coming says the Lord of Hosts. “Therefore, so said the Lord: 'I have returned to Jerusalem with mercy; My house shall be built there,' says the Lord of Hosts. 'And a plumb line shall be stretched out over Jerusalem.' Further, proclaim, saying: so said the Lord of Hosts, 'My cities shall yet spread out with prosperity, and the Lord shall yet console Zion and shall yet choose Jerusalem.'” (Zechariah 1:16-17) “Be exceedingly happy, O daughter of Zion; Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem. Behold! Your king shall come to you. He is just and victorious; humble, and riding a donkey and a foal, the offspring of she-donkeys.” (Zechariah 9:9)

4) (Vayikra 27:33) ("He shall not discriminate between good and bad, and he shall not substitute for it; and if he did substitute for it, then it and its substitute shall be holy. It shall not be redeemed.") Because it is written (Devarim 12:11) "and all the choicest of your vows," I might think that he should "spy out" (his flock) and pick out the choicest (for ma'aser); it is, therefore, written "he shall not discriminate between good and bad." "and he shall not substitute for it": If he did, he receives forty lashes. "if substitute he shall substitute": to include his wife. "and if substitute he shall substitute": to include his heir. "then it and its substitute shall be holy. It shall not be redeemed": About a bechor it is written (Bamidbar 18:17) "you shall not redeem," (but) it is sold, when whole, alive. And when blemished, (it is sold) alive or slaughtered; but (it is) not (sold) slaughtered when whole. And about ma'aser it is written (here) "It shall not be redeemed." And it is not to be sold neither alive nor slaughtered; nor whole nor blemished.

4) I might think that the entire beast is permitted; it is, therefore, written (Bereshith 9:4): "Only the flesh with its life, its blood, you shall not eat" — ever min hechai (a limb torn from a living animal) is forbidden. (Bereshith 32:33): "Therefore, the children of Israel may not eat the thigh sinew (gid hanasheh)" — the gid hanasheh is forbidden. (Vayikra 7:3): "All fats (cheilev) of ox or sheep or goat you shall not eat" — cheilev is forbidden. (Vayikra 7:26): "And all blood you shall not eat" — blood is forbidden. I might think that they are permitted whether slaughtered (by shechitah) or not slaughtered, (but killed in some other way); it is, therefore, written (Devarim 27:7): "And you shall slaughter (by shechitah) … and you shall eat."

When the Lord enlarges your territory (Deuteronomy 12:20): This is what is stated in the verse (Proverbs 18:16), "A man’s gift eases his way." It is a gift so that a person will give from his, that the Holy One, blessed be He, enlarges [what he has]. There is a [relevant] story about Abbun Ramah (probably a nickname, meaning the father of tricking) who lived in Batsra. His rabbis went to there and were seeking sustenance. He sat and did not decide [what he would give] at first, until all the people of the city decided, so that he could decide corresponding to all [the others]. That is why he was called Abbun Ramah, as he would be tricky with all of the commandments. From when he knew how much all of the people of the city had decided, he decided corresponding to all of them. What did our rabbis do? They took him and sat him at the edge next to them, in order to fulfill that which is stated, "A man’s gift eases his way [and places him next to the great]." Another interpretation of "A man’s gift eases his way": This is [referring to] Avraham. When he chased the [four] kings, the king of Sodom came out to greet him. He said to him (Genesis 14:21), "Give me the persons, and take the possessions for yourself." Avraham said [back], "I have raised my hand to the Lord, God Most High [.... I will not take] so much as a thread or a sandal strap, etc." The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, "You have said, 'a thread [or a sandal strap]." By your life, I will sustain your children with that same expression, 'How lovely are your feet in sandals' (Song of Songs 7:2)." Another interpretation of "A man’s gift eases his way": This is [referring to] Israel. When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to them to bring a freewill offering, what is written there? "These continued to bring freewill offerings to [Moshe] morning after morning" (Exodus 36:3), two mornings. What did they merit [by this]? He enlarged their territory, as stated, "When the Lord enlarges your territory." In the merit of what does He enlarge it, "as he stated to you" (Deuteronomy 12:20)? In the merit of the ten statements (Ten Commandments) that you accepted. Another interpretation: "As he stated," in the merit of your forefathers.

5) It was said in the name of R. Yishmael: It is written (Bamidbar 18:17): But the bechor (the first-born) of an ox, or the bechor of a sheep, or the bechor of a goat, you shall not redeem. They are consecrated. Their blood shall you sprinkle upon the altar and their fat shall you smoke.": This teaches us that a bechor requires blood and fats upon the altar. Whence do we derive the same for ma'aser and pesach? From (Devarim 12:27): "And the blood of your sacrifices shall be spilled on the altar of your G d (first), and (then) the flesh shall you eat." This tells me only of their blood. Whence do I derive (the same for) their fat? From (Vayikra 3:16): "all the fat for the L–rd."

And you say, "I shall eat meat" (Deuteronomy 12:20): Rabbi Eliezer beRabbi Yehoshua said, "From here you learn that a man should not acquire a litra of meat until he consults with his household." See what is [the difference] between the Israel and the [other] nations of the world. When Israel do not [ritually] slaughter, they do not eat [meat]. But the nations of the world stab and eat. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, "By your life, in the world to come, you will eat from those [animals] that are not slaughtered, from the behemoths and the Leviathan, about which it is written, 'One [scale] touches the other; not even a breath can enter between them.'"

6) Similarly: (Devarim 12:2-3) "Destroy shall you destroy all the places … and you shall throw down their altars, etc." Now if of the places and the tree (used for idolatry), which cannot see and cannot hear and cannot speak, because they led to a man's undoing, Scripture writes "Destroy!" "Burn!" "Raze!" and "Remove (them) from the world!" then a man who leads his fellow to veer from the path of life to the path of death — how much more so should the Holy One remove him from the world! What is written of the righteous? (Devarim 20:19) "If you besiege a city many days to war upon it, to capture it, do not destroy its tree by lifting an axe against it, for from it shall you eat, but it shall you not cut down": Now does this not follow a fortiori: If trees, which do not see, and which do not hear, and which do not speak — because they grow fruits, the Holy One pitied them, not to remove them from the world, then a man who "grows" Torah and does the will of his Father in heaven — how much more so will the Holy One pity him against removing him from the world!

When the Lord cuts down (Deuteronomy 12:29): The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, "By your lives, I will conduct your wars and write about you that you killed them." Come and see, the acts of the Holy One, blessed be He, are not like the acts of a king of flesh and blood: [When] a king of flesh and blood goes out to war, his legions go out in front of him. If they are victorious, they come and make a crown and crown him. But the Holy One, blessed be He, does not do like this, but rather He conducts the war, and give the crown to Israel, as it is stated (Psalms 136:17-20), "Who struck down great kings, [...]. Sihon, king of the Amorites,[...]. Og, king of Bashan." But He gave the crown to Israel, as it is stated (Joshua 12:5), "Moshe, the servant of God, and Israel smote them." And so [too], with Yehoshua, what is written? "And the Lord hurled huge stones on them from the sky" (Joshua 10:11). And [yet] it is stated (Joshua 12:7), "And these are the kings of the land that Yehoshua and the Children of Israel slew." So that we inherit their land, He cut them down from the world, in order that we would enter and inherit houses filled with all good things. As all the days that Israel was present, they were swept and wandering in the wilderness for forty years. Yet they had been fitting to go up [to the Land of Israel] immediately, as it is stated (Exodus 3:17), "I will take you out of the misery of Egypt," to a good and spacious land. But they did not go in immediately. As when they left from Egypt, the seven nations [inhabiting the land] heard that [the Israelites] were coming to inherit [the land]. What did they do? They cut down the trees, stopped up the springs and destroyed the homes, such that if [the Israelites] would enter, they would find nothing [worthwhile there]. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "If I bring them in right away, they will find it desolate, and I promised them that they would find it full of all of good things." What did He do? He held them up in the wilderness forty years, such that the Canaanites disregarded Israel, saying they are not coming. [Hence] they rose and planted trees, they fixed the wells and the cities, such that Israel would come when it was built, to fulfill that which is stated (Deuteronomy 6:11), "Houses full of all good things." This is [the meaning of] that which is written (Exodus 13:17), "God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines." Once they fixed everything, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moshe, "Why are you standing? 'Go up from here, you and the people' (Exodus 33:1). Make war with them and cut them down." And Israel said to Moshe, "When do we enter the land." [His answer was:] When the Lord, your God cuts down the nations within it shall you enter.

7 (a reversion to R. Yehudah:) I might think that the blood of consecrated animals which have been rendered pasul (by a permanent blemish) also comes under two interdicts (that of eating blood and that of a non-Cohein eating consecrated food); it is, therefore, written (in relation to such animals, Devarim 12:16): "Only the blood you shall not eat." It comes only under one exhortation (that against eating fat, but not that against a non-Cohein eating consecrated food). This tells me only of their blood. Whence do I derive (the same for) their fat? From: "all fat and all blood you shall not eat." Just as the blood comes under one interdict, so the fat comes under one interdict (as above).

7) "and he shall slaughter it" "and he shall slaughter it" (Vayikra 3:8), "and he shall slaughter it" (Vayikra 3:13): Why three times? Because it is written (Devarim 12:21): "If the place be distant from you in which the L–rd your G d shall choose to place His name, (and you will not be able to come and bring peace-offerings every day, as you can now that the mishkan travels with you), then you shall slaughter of your herd and of your flock … and you shall eat in your gates with all the desire of your soul" — At a distance from the place (i.e., the Temple), you may slaughter (and eat), and not in proximity to the place — to exclude chullin (a non-consecrated animal) from being slaughtered in the azarah.

7) From this it was ruled: If the limb of a Paschal offering projected beyond the wall (the permitted bound), he cuts until he reaches the bone and strips (the flesh) until he reaches the joint, wherefrom he frees it and cuts it off, (it being forbidden to break the bone of a Paschal offering). And with (other) offerings, he chops it off at any place (including the bone), breaking the bone not being interdicted in the others.

7) "And thirty days (and three days shall she abide in the blood of cleanliness"): I might think, either consecutive or scattered; it is, therefore, written "thirty day" (lit.) — Just as one day is consecutive, so are thirty. I might then think that the thirty are consecutive, but the three may be either consecutive or scattered; it is, therefore, written "and thirty days and three days" — Just as the thirty are consecutive, so the three are consecutive. Why need "thirty-three days" be written? (i.e., Since we find that the cleanliness days for a female are doubled, those for a female being sixty-six (viz. Devarim 12:5), we understand that those for a male must be thirty-three.) I might reason: If for a female, for which the days of uncleanliness are many (fourteen), the days of cleanliness are many (sixty-six), than for a male, for which the days of uncleanliness are few (seven), how much more so should the days of cleanliness be many! It is, therefore, written "thirty-three days." "she shall abide": to include a woman who experienced labor pains (and bleeding) in the midst of the eleven days (separating her niddah times) as being clean of zivah uncleanliness, (the assumption being that the bleeding was caused by the contractions and not by the zivah). I might think that she would likewise be clean if she experienced this in the midst of her niddah time; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 12:2) "(any blood that she sees) in (the time of) her niddah flow, she shall be unclean." ("And thirty-three days she shall abide in) the blood of cleanliness": Even if she sees blood (in that period) she is clean.

When the Lord cuts down, etc. (Deuteronomy 12:29): "Look to the Lord and keep to His way" (Psalms 37:34). As they were thinking to enter the Land immediately. [Moshe] said to them, "You are thinking to inherit their land. [So] keep the way of the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is stated (Psalms 37:34), 'Look to the Lord and keep to His way, and He will raise you high that you may inherit the land; when the wicked are cut off, you shall see it.'" That is [the meaning of] that which Moshe said, "When the Lord, your God, cuts down." What is [the meaning of] "When (ki, which can also mean, if) He cuts down?" It is on condition; such that if they keep the Torah, they will enter the Land. And in every place that you find ki, it is conditional: "Ki along the road, you chance upon a bird’s nest [...]. You shall surely send" (Deuteronomy 22:6-7); "Ki you take up the head (make a census) of the Children of Israel, each man shall give a ransom" (Exodus 30:12);" Ki you build a new house, you shall make a parapet" (Deuteronomy 22:8). Here too, the Holy One, blessed be He stipulated with them that He would only cut down the [Canaanite] nations on condition that [the Israelites] would keep the Torah. Beloved is the Land of Israel, as the Holy One, blessed be He, chose it. You find that when He created the world, He apportioned the lands to the ministering angels of the nations, and He chose the Land of Israel [for Himself]. From where [do we know this]? As so did Moshe say (Deuteronomy 32:8), "When the Most High gave nations their inheritances, etc." And He chose [the people of] Israel as His portion, as stated (Deuteronomy 32:9), "For the Lord’s portion is His people, Yaakov His allotment." The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "Let Israel, who has come to be My portion, inherit the land that has come to be My portion." Hence it is written, "When the Lord cuts down." Yirmiyahu the prophet cried out and said (Jeremiah 3:19), "I had resolved to adopt you as My child, and I gave you a desirable land," a land that the fathers of the world desired. Avraham wanted it, as so does it state (Genesis 15:8), "And he said, 'O Lord God, how shall I know that I am to possess it?'" Yitschak wanted it, as it was stated to him (Genesis 26:3), "Reside in this land, and I will be with you and bless you, for I will assign all these lands to you and to your seed." And Yaakov wanted it, as it is stated (Genesis 28:20-21), "If God will be with me, etc. I will return to my father’s house." Rabbi Yehudah said, "Moshe also wanted it, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 3:23-25), 'I pleaded with the Lord at that time, "[...]. Let me, I pray, cross over and see, etc."' And also David wanted it, as it is stated (Psalms 84:11), 'I would rather stand (histofef) at the threshold of [my God’s] house.'" What is [the meaning of] histofef? Rabbi Tanchum beRabbi Chanilai and Rav [differed on the matter]. One said, "David said in front of the Holy One, blessed be He, 'Master of the world, even if I have palaces and a castle outside of the Land, and I only have a veranda (saf) in the Land of Israel, I would rather stand [there].'" And [the other] said [that David said], "Even if I only have lateling (sifsuf) carobs to eat in the Land of Israel, I would rather stand [there]." Hence, "and I gave you a desirable land," a land that the fathers desired. "An inheritance of beauty (tsvi, literally, a gazelle)" (Jeremiah 3:19). Just like a gazelle is light in its running, so does the Land of Israel run its fruits, such that it gives fruit first. Another interpretation: Just like the skin of a gazelle cannot hold its flesh, so [too], when Israel merits, the Land of Israel cannot hold its fruit. "Of the beauties (tsivaot) of the nations" (Jeremiah 3:19). That the delights (tsivionot) of the nations are in it. It is written (Joshua 12:9), "The king of Yericho one; the king of Ai, near Bethel, one." There is only three [mil] between the one and the other, and it states, "The king of Yericho one; the king of Ai, etc., one?" Rabbi Parnakh said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan, "Any king that was outside the Land that did not acquire a city in the Land of Israel was not called a king. See what is written about Akhan (Joshua 7:21), 'I saw among the spoil a fine Shinar mantle.' [That is] Babylonian velvet. And from where was there Babylonian velvet in Yericho? Rather it was that the King of Babylonia was there and acquired a city in the Land of Israel." Hence, the land that the delights of the nations of the world are in it. And He gave it to Israel. Therefore, it is written, "When the Lord, your God, cuts down, etc."

8) (Vayikra 7:19) "Everyone that is clean may eat (the) flesh": What are we taught hereby? Because it is written (Devarim 12:27): "And the blood of your sacrifices (peace-offerings) shall be spilled on the altar of the L–rd your G d, and the flesh shall you eat," I might think that only the owner can eat it, a fortiori from the Pesach offering (where only the owner and his appointees eat it), it is, therefore, written "Everyone that is clean may eat (the) flesh." I might think that there is tumah liability (for eating consecrated flesh even) before the sprinkling of the blood; it is, therefore, written "Everyone that is clean may eat (the) flesh," followed by (Devarim 12:20) "And the soul that eats flesh, etc." — There is tumah liability only for flesh that is permitted to (be eaten by) the clean. But, before the sprinkling of the blood, when the flesh is not permitted to the clean, it does not entail tumah liability. You say that this is the intent of the verse; but perhaps the intent is: For what may be eaten by the clean, there is tumah liability; but if it left (its permitted bounds) after the sprinkling of the blood, since it may not be eaten by the clean, there is no tumah liability. It is, therefore, (to negate this,) written (Devarim 12:20): ("the sacrifice of the peace-offerings) which is the L–rd's" — to include (in the kareth interdict for tumah) one that left (its permitted bounds) or abided beyond its prescribed time (for eating, i.e., nothar).

8) (Vayikra 7:19) "Everyone that is clean may eat (the) flesh": What are we taught hereby? Because it is written (Devarim 12:27): "And the blood of your sacrifices (peace-offerings) shall be spilled on the altar of the L–rd your G d, and the flesh shall you eat," I might think that only the owner can eat it, a fortiori from the Pesach offering (where only the owner and his appointees eat it), it is, therefore, written "Everyone that is clean may eat (the) flesh." I might think that there is tumah liability (for eating consecrated flesh even) before the sprinkling of the blood; it is, therefore, written "Everyone that is clean may eat (the) flesh," followed by (Devarim 12:20) "And the soul that eats flesh, etc." — There is tumah liability only for flesh that is permitted to (be eaten by) the clean. But, before the sprinkling of the blood, when the flesh is not permitted to the clean, it does not entail tumah liability. You say that this is the intent of the verse; but perhaps the intent is: For what may be eaten by the clean, there is tumah liability; but if it left (its permitted bounds) after the sprinkling of the blood, since it may not be eaten by the clean, there is no tumah liability. It is, therefore, (to negate this,) written (Devarim 12:20): ("the sacrifice of the peace-offerings) which is the L–rd's" — to include (in the kareth interdict for tumah) one that left (its permitted bounds) or abided beyond its prescribed time (for eating, i.e., nothar).

(Lev. 17:1, 3:) “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses, ‘Speak to Aaron saying, “…. If any single person from the House of Israel slaughters.”’” The holy spirit proclaims (in Mal. 1:11), “From the rising of the sun to its setting, My name shall be great among the gentiles.” From the time that the sun rises until it sets, the praise⁶¹Qillus. Cf. the Greek, kalos (“beautiful”). of the Holy One, blessed be He, never ceases from its mouth, as stated (in Ps. 113:3), “From the rising of the sun to its setting, the name of the Lord is praised.” And you find it so when Joshua waged war with Gibeon. What is written there (in Josh. 10:12)? “Then Joshua spoke to the Lord…, ‘O sun, be quiet (dom)⁶²Although dom can mean “stand still”, it commonly means, “be quiet” in the sense of “be silent.” It is this latter sense which the midrash is stressing here. at Gibeon.’” [When] Joshua wanted to silence the sun, he did not say to it, "O sun, stand still ('amod) at Gibeon," but “Be quiet (dom).” Why did he say, “Be quiet?” Because every hour that it is traveling, it is praising the Holy One, blessed be He; and as long as it praises [the Holy One, blessed be He], it has the power to travel [its course]. Joshua therefore told it to be silent, as stated (ibid.), “O sun, be quiet at Gibeon.” The sun said to Joshua, “May someone younger be saying, ‘Be quiet,’ to someone older? I was created on the fourth [day], while human beings were created on the sixth; and are you saying, ‘Be quiet,’ to me?” Joshua said to [the sun], “When a young free person has an elderly slave, does he not say to him, ‘Be silent?’ In the case of our father Abraham, the Holy One, blessed be He, delivered (rt.: pnh) heaven and earth to him, as stated (in Gen. 14:19), ‘Then he blessed him, and said, “Blessed be Abram of God most high, acquirer (rt.: pnh)⁶³Apart from the context in the midrash, a traditional biblical translation would read: CREATOR. of heaven and earth.”’ And not only that, but you bowed down to Joseph, as stated (in Gen. 37:9), ‘here were the sun, the moon, [and eleven stars bowing down to me.’ So would you speak against me?]” Ergo (in Josh. 10:12), “O sun, be quiet at Gibeon.” The sun said to Joshua, “And so are you decreeing over me that I am to be quiet?” He said to it, “Yes.” It said to him, “Then who will speak the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He?“ He said to him, “You be quiet, and I will speak the praise of the Holy One, blessed be He,” as stated (in Josh. 10:12), “Then (az) Joshua spoke to the Lord.” Now az can only be a hymn, since it is stated (in Exod. 15:1), “Moses sang then (az).”⁶⁴THEN is understood as the object of the verb SANG. See Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 1:32; Exod. 4:12. (Mal. 1:11:) “And in every place incense is offered to My name, even a pure oblation.” R. Ammi asked R. Samuel bar Nahman, “Is it correct that ‘In every place incense is offered to My name, even a pure oblation?’⁶⁵See Numb. R. 13:4. The Torah warns (in Deut. 12:13-14), ‘Take heed that you do not offer up your burnt offerings in any place that you see. But only in the place that [the Lord] will choose….’ So also it says (in Lev. 17:3-4) ‘If any single person from the House of Israel slaughters an ox, a lamb, or a goat in the camp…. And does not bring it unto the entrance of the tent of meeting…, [bloodguilt shall be imputed to that person.’ So how can you] say (in Mal. 1:11), ‘and in every place incense (muqtar) is offered to My name, [even a pure oblation]?’” R. Samuel bar Nahman said to him (i.e., to R. Ammi), “What is a pure oblation (minhah) which is burned (muqtar) in every place and offered to the name of the Holy One, blessed be He?⁶⁶The Hebrew wording of this question reproduces almost exactly the wording in Mal. 1:11. This is the prayer of the afternoon service (minhah). Incense (muqtar) can only be the prayer of the afternoon service (minhah), since it is stated (in Ps. 141:2), ‘Let my prayer be set forth as the incense before you….’ [It also says] (in I Kings 18:36), ‘And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the oblation (minhah), Elijah drew near.’”

(Deut. 12:29:) When the Lord God has cut off the nations.” A parable: To what is the matter comparable? To a king who planted a vineyard within his field, but within [that field] were great cedars and thorns. The king went and cut down the cedars and left the thorns. His servants said to him, “Our lord king, the thorns which catch our clothes you have left [standing]; but you have cut down the cedars?” He said to them, “If I had left the cedars and cut down the thornbushes, how should I have fenced in my vineyard. So also Israel is the vineyard of the Holy One, blessed be He, as stated (in Is. 5:7), “For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the House of Israel.” He brought Israel into the land and cut down the cedars that were in it, as stated (in Amos 2:9), “Yet I destroyed the Amorites before you, whose stature was like the cedars in height.” But he left their children and their children's children so that Israel would observe the Torah, as stated (in Jud. 3:1), “Now these are the nations which the Lord left to test Israel,” “whether they are keeping the commandments of the Lord” (Jud. 2:22). So when the vineyard stands in its place in the service of the Torah, then (according to Is. 33:12) “The peoples shall become burnings of lime, thorns cut down that are burned in the fire].” It is also written (in Is. 40:17), “All the nations are as nothing before Him….” And so do you find when Israel left Egypt. Look at what Pharaoh did. “He took six hundred choice chariots…” (Exod. 14:6). Thirty men went out against each and every one of Israel. See how many multitudes³Gk.: ochloi. went out with Pharaoh! When Israel saw them, they were terrified before them. What is written (in Exod. 14:19)? “And the angel of God traveled.” And Israel was saying, “Who can stand against these?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, “By your lives, all these are as unimportant before Me as [if they were only] a single man or a single chariot, as stated (in Exod. 15:19), “When the horse (in the singular) of Pharaoh came….” And [so] they all died in a single breath (rt.: nshp), as stated (in Exod. 15:10), “You blew (rt.: nshp) with Your wind, and the sea covered them.” Similarly Gog and Magog are going to come against Israel in the future, and all of them will also all be burnt with one burning, as stated (in Ezek. 38:22), “I will enter into judgment against him with pestilence and with blood […].” At that time (according to Ezek. 38:23), “And I will be magnified, be sanctified, and be made known before the eyes of many nations; and they shall know that I am the Lord.”

9) "the whole": to include the bone, the sinews, the horns, the hooves, the wool on the heads of sheep, the chin-hair of he-goats. I might think (that this applies) even if they had become detached; it is, therefore, written (Devarim 12:27): "And you shall offer your burnt-offerings, the flesh …" If "And you shall offer your burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood," I might think the sinews and bones should be extracted, and the flesh offered (on the altar); it is, therefore, written "the whole," to include these. How is this to be reconciled? When they are attached (to the flesh) they are to be offered up. If they have become detached, even if they are on top of the altar, they are to be taken down.

(Lev. 17:3:) “If any single person from the House of Israel.” This text is related (to Ps. 51:20–21), “Make Zion prosper in Your good pleasure; rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. Then You shall delight in sacrifices of righteousness, burnt offerings, and whole offerings….” To what is the matter comparable? To a rich and noble man, who has no wife. His house was not [really] a house. Why? When the tenants came, he said to them, “Go rest in another place.” Why? Because he had neither house nor wife. He took a wife. He said to them, “Whatever you bring me, from now on bring them up to the house.” Thus all the days before Moses erected the tent of meeting, they offered sacrifices [in] any place, as stated (in Exod. 24:5), “Then he sent youths of the Children of Israel, and they offered burnt offerings….” And so it says (in Exod. 8:23), “Let us go a distance of three days into the wilderness and sacrifice to the Lord our God.” When the tabernacle was raised, the [Holy One, blessed be He,] said to Moses, “From now on you are only permitted to offer sacrifice in the tent of meeting”; and there they offered up the [gift]⁶⁷Gk.: doron. to the Holy One, blessed be He. It is so stated (in Deut. 12:13-14), “Take heed that you do not offer up your burnt offerings in any place that you see. But only in the place that the Lord will choose.” And where did the Holy One, blessed be He, choose? Jerusalem, as stated (in Ps. 132:13), “For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His dwelling.” Moses therefore warns Israel, saying (in Lev. 17:3-4), “If any single person from the House of Israel [slaughters an ox, a lamb, or a goat in the camp]…. And does not bring it unto the entrance of the tent of meeting to offer it as a sacrifice… [bloodguilt shall be imputed to that person].“ The Holy One, blessed be He, foresaw that the Temple was going to be destroyed; so the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “As long as the Temple exists, you shall sacrifice within it, [and] there will be atonement for you; but when the Temple does not exist, how will there be atonement for you? Occupy yourselves with the words of Torah, because they are comparable with offerings, and they will atone for you.” Thus it is stated (ibid.), “This is the thing (literally: word).” So also the prophet says (in Hos. 14:3), “Take words with you, and return unto the Lord.” The words of Torah resemble all the offerings. One offers wine as a libation upon the altar, as stated (in Numb. 15:5), “And a quarter hin of wine for a libation”; and Torah resembles wine, as stated (in Prov. 9:5, where wisdom says), “and drink of the wine I have mixed.” One offers bread upon the altar, as stated (in Numb. 28:2), “My offering, My bread for My fire offering; and so it says (in Exod. 25:30), “And you shall set the [show]bread upon the table before Me always”; and Torah resembles bread, as stated (in Prov. 9:5, where wisdom says), “Come and eat of my bread.” One offers oil upon the altar, as stated (in Lev. 2:5), “fine flour mixed with oil”; and Torah resembles oil, as stated (in Eccl. 9:8), “Always let your clothes be white, and let there be no lack of oil upon your head.”⁶⁸Cf. Eccl. R. 9:8:1, which also understands this verse as referring to Torah.

(Lev. 17:3:) “If any single person from the House of Israel slaughters.” R. Aqiva says, “When Israel was in the desert, they would slaughter cattle by stabbing and eat them; but here the Torah has forbidden it and says to them (ibid.), ‘If any single person from the House of Israel….’⁶⁹Lev. R. 22:7; see Hul. 16b-17a; Sifre, Deut. 12:20 (75). Then it told them, ‘You are forbidden to slaughter apart from the tent of meeting (cf. vs. 4).’” R. Ishmael says, “When Moses said this to them, they were craving to eat meat. At that time, they were cautioned⁷⁰Hizhiru ‘atsman. The verbal expression is used for an explicit biblical prohibition. away from slaughtering, i.e., not to slaughter apart from the tent of meeting.” And why so? It is simply that up to then they had been lusting after idols. Where is it shown that they were slaughtering to idols? Where it is stated (in Lev. 17:7), “And they shall no longer offer sacrifices [to the goat demons after whom they went whoring]….”⁷¹Lev. R. 22:8. When they wished to enter the Land of Israel, they came to Moses. They said to him, “O our master, if we wish to eat flesh, how shall we do so?” He said to them, “In the past, when you were in the desert, you were forbidden to slaughter apart from the tent of meeting; but when you enter the land, you are permitted to slaughter in any place,” as stated (in Deut. 12:20), “When the Lord your God enlarges your territory, as He promised you, [and you say, ‘Let me eat meat, because your soul longs to eat flesh,’ you may eat flesh to your soul's desire].” He said to them, “When I shall have permitted you to slaughter, you may [nonetheless] not take from your flock and slaughter.” Solomon said (in Prov. 27:27), “And there will be enough goat's milk for your food, for the food of your household.” Moses was teaching Israel by saying to them, “If you have sheep, that which you shear is for your clothing,” as stated (in Prov. 27:26), “The sheep will be for your clothes, and the he-goats the reward of a field.” What is the meaning of “and the he-goats the reward of a field?” That whatever you gain as reward from the he-goats that procreate the herd, you are to buy fields with it (i.e., the offspring).⁷²But cf. Hul. 84a. (Prov. 27:27:) “And there will be enough goat's milk,” [meaning] you will have enough goat's milk “for your food, for the food of your household.” R. Aqiva said, “See how the Holy One, blessed be He, cares for the assets of Israel. See what is written (in Deut. 12:21), ‘then you may slaughter from your cattle or flock,’ from what they bear.⁷³T‘Arakh. 4:26. You shall only take and sacrifice from what they give birth to.” Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Deut. 15:19), “[You shall consecrate to the Lord] all the male firstlings which are born in your herd and in your flock.” You are permitted to sacrifice from what they give birth to. R. Eleazar ben Azariah said, “The Torah has taught you a rule of conduct:⁷⁴T‘Arakh. 4:26; Hul. 84a. If someone from Israel should have ten pounds⁷⁵Gk.: litrai. of silver, let him eat green vegetables in the pot; if he has twenty, let him eat them in a casserole;⁷⁶Gk.: lopas (“flat dish”). if he has thirty, let him eat a pound of meat from Sabbath to Sabbath; and if he has fifty, let him eat meat on each [and every] day.” Now why all this? In order to care for the assets of Israel. R. Eleazar ben Shammua' said, “And when he buys from Sabbath to Sabbath, he should not buy until he consults within his household.” Where is it shown? Because it is so written (in Deut. 12:20), “and you say, ‘Let me eat meat,’” For this reason Moses warned them and gave them a hint (in vs. 21), so that they would not do too much slaughtering.

(Lev. 17:3:) “If any single person from the House of Israel slaughters.” R. Aqiva says, “When Israel was in the desert, they would slaughter cattle by stabbing and eat them; but here the Torah has forbidden it and says to them (ibid.), ‘If any single person from the House of Israel….’⁶⁹Lev. R. 22:7; see Hul. 16b-17a; Sifre, Deut. 12:20 (75). Then it told them, ‘You are forbidden to slaughter apart from the tent of meeting (cf. vs. 4).’” R. Ishmael says, “When Moses said this to them, they were craving to eat meat. At that time, they were cautioned⁷⁰Hizhiru ‘atsman. The verbal expression is used for an explicit biblical prohibition. away from slaughtering, i.e., not to slaughter apart from the tent of meeting.” And why so? It is simply that up to then they had been lusting after idols. Where is it shown that they were slaughtering to idols? Where it is stated (in Lev. 17:7), “And they shall no longer offer sacrifices [to the goat demons after whom they went whoring]….”⁷¹Lev. R. 22:8. When they wished to enter the Land of Israel, they came to Moses. They said to him, “O our master, if we wish to eat flesh, how shall we do so?” He said to them, “In the past, when you were in the desert, you were forbidden to slaughter apart from the tent of meeting; but when you enter the land, you are permitted to slaughter in any place,” as stated (in Deut. 12:20), “When the Lord your God enlarges your territory, as He promised you, [and you say, ‘Let me eat meat, because your soul longs to eat flesh,’ you may eat flesh to your soul's desire].” He said to them, “When I shall have permitted you to slaughter, you may [nonetheless] not take from your flock and slaughter.” Solomon said (in Prov. 27:27), “And there will be enough goat's milk for your food, for the food of your household.” Moses was teaching Israel by saying to them, “If you have sheep, that which you shear is for your clothing,” as stated (in Prov. 27:26), “The sheep will be for your clothes, and the he-goats the reward of a field.” What is the meaning of “and the he-goats the reward of a field?” That whatever you gain as reward from the he-goats that procreate the herd, you are to buy fields with it (i.e., the offspring).⁷²But cf. Hul. 84a. (Prov. 27:27:) “And there will be enough goat's milk,” [meaning] you will have enough goat's milk “for your food, for the food of your household.” R. Aqiva said, “See how the Holy One, blessed be He, cares for the assets of Israel. See what is written (in Deut. 12:21), ‘then you may slaughter from your cattle or flock,’ from what they bear.⁷³T‘Arakh. 4:26. You shall only take and sacrifice from what they give birth to.” Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Deut. 15:19), “[You shall consecrate to the Lord] all the male firstlings which are born in your herd and in your flock.” You are permitted to sacrifice from what they give birth to. R. Eleazar ben Azariah said, “The Torah has taught you a rule of conduct:⁷⁴T‘Arakh. 4:26; Hul. 84a. If someone from Israel should have ten pounds⁷⁵Gk.: litrai. of silver, let him eat green vegetables in the pot; if he has twenty, let him eat them in a casserole;⁷⁶Gk.: lopas (“flat dish”). if he has thirty, let him eat a pound of meat from Sabbath to Sabbath; and if he has fifty, let him eat meat on each [and every] day.” Now why all this? In order to care for the assets of Israel. R. Eleazar ben Shammua' said, “And when he buys from Sabbath to Sabbath, he should not buy until he consults within his household.” Where is it shown? Because it is so written (in Deut. 12:20), “and you say, ‘Let me eat meat,’” For this reason Moses warned them and gave them a hint (in vs. 21), so that they would not do too much slaughtering.

A firstborn human must be redeemed when thirty days old;¹³Firstborn boys are redeemed through the pidyon ha-ben ceremony at the end of thirty days. As indicated above, those born by Caesarean section are exempt. if it survives less than this it is considered a premature child and is exempt from this regulation. The firstborn beast must be redeemed on the eighth day; if it survives less than this it is considered a premature birth. In reference to a human, it is written: And their redemption money—from a month old shalt thou redeem them (Num. 18:16), while in regard to beasts, it is written: But from the eighth day and henceforth it may be accepted (Lev. 22:27). That is, after one is able to lead it to the Temple, since it is said: And thither you shall bring your burnt offerings (Deut. 12:6). In the case of the firstborn of your flock and herds, Scripture says: Thou shalt redeem. This implies that one may redeem the offering from the priest whenever (he wishes). (But if that is so)¹⁴Etz Joseph omits the parenthesized words. Why does the Scripture say: Thou shalt sanctify to the Lord? So that you receive a reward for so doing. But even if you should not sanctify it, it is consecrated, nevertheless, to the Lord, since as Scripture says: It is mine. Why then does Scripture decree Thou shalt sanctify it? In order that you may be rewarded for doing so (voluntarily).

12) "the blood on the altar" — And not the dasher (of the blood) on the altar (i.e., he should not stand on the foundation of the altar [the yesod], but on the floor alongside it). Another nuance of "the blood on the altar" — (the blood should be dashed on the altar) even in the absence of the flesh (e.g., if it became unclean or were lost.) If so, how am I to understand (Devarim 12:27): "And you shall sacrifice your burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood"? Blood and flesh are being likened to each other, viz., just as the blood is flung on the altar, so, the flesh. I might think he flings them (the pieces) so that they form a pile; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 1:12): "And the Cohein shall arrange them." How is this (fling-arrange) to be reconciled? He flings them in such a way that they fall into an orderly arrangement.

(Lev. 15:25:) AND WHEN A WOMAN HAS HAD A DISCHARGE OF BLOOD < FOR MANY DAYS, NOT AT THE TIME OF HER IMPURITY >…. Let our master instruct us: Is it permitted for a menstruant to sleep in the same bed with her husband, when he is in his clothes and she is in her clothes, one on one side and one on the other?⁵⁰Tanh., Lev. 5:5; Shab. 13a. Thus have our masters taught: It is forbidden < for them > to lie down < together >, because one does not one put a loophole before the observant person, and certainly not before the thief. Thus the sages compare the matter to a fire in the straw; and it says (in Lev. 18:19): AND YOU SHALL NOT COME NEAR A WOMEN DURING HER PERIOD OF MENSTRUAL UNCLEANNESS. < This is > to teach you that the Holy One warns Israel about sanctification and about purity, lest they act according to the practice of star worshipers and become unclean through their wives when they are menstruating; for whoever has intercourse with his wife when she is menstruating is under sentence of being cut off, as stated (in Lev. 20:18): AND IF A MAN LIES WITH A WOMAN < WHEN SHE IS > UNWELL…, THEY BOTH SHALL BE CUT OFF < FROM AMONG THEIR PEOPLE >. Because star worshipers do not stay away from the menstruant they are under sentence of being cut off, as stated (in Deut. 12:29): WHEN THE LORD [GOD] HAS CUT OFF THE GENTILES. Because all the star worshipers are children of menstruants, they like their idolatry are called an impurity, an uncleanness, an abomination, and a destruction. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 7:26): DO NOT BRING AN ABOMINATION UNTO YOUR HOUSE.

(Lev. 17:1 & 3:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES, SAYING…. IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL SLAUGHTERS AN OX, A LAMB, OR A GOAT IN THE CAMP. The Holy Spirit proclaims (in Mal. 1:11): FROM THE RISING OF THE SUN TO ITS SETTING [MY NAME SHALL BE GREAT AMONG THE GENTILES AND IN EVERY PLACE INCENSE IS OFFERED TO MY NAME, EVEN A PURE OBLATION].⁷²Tanh., Lev. 6:9. From the time that the sun rises until it sets, the praise⁷³Qillus. Cf. the Greek, kalos (“beautiful”). of the Holy One never ceases from its mouth, as stated (in Ps. 113:3): FROM THE RISING OF THE SUN TO ITS SETTING, THE NAME OF THE LORD IS PRAISED. And you find it so when Joshua waged war with Gibeon. What is written there (in Josh. 10:12)? THEN JOSHUA SPOKE TO THE LORD…: O SUN, BE QUIET (dom)⁷⁴Although dom can mean “stand still”, it commonly means, “be quiet” in the sense of “be silent.” It is this latter sense which the midrash is stressing here. AT GIBEON. < When > Joshua wanted to silence the sun, he did not say to it: "O Sun, stand still ('amod) at Gibeon," but BE QUIET (dom). Why did he say; BE QUIET? Because every hour that it is traveling, it is praising the Holy One; and as long as it praises < the Holy One >, it has the power to travel < its course >. Joshua therefore told it to be silent, as stated (ibid.): O SUN, BE QUIET AT GIBEON. The sun said to Joshua: Is someone younger saying, BE QUIET, to someone older? I was created on the fourth < day >, while human beings were created on the sixth; so are you saying, BE QUIET, to me? Joshua said to < the sun >: When a young free person has an elderly slave, does he not say to him: Be silent? In the case of our father Abraham, the Holy One delivered (rt.: PNH) heaven and earth to him, as stated (in Gen. 14:19): THEN HE BLESSED HIM, AND SAID: BLESSED BE ABRAM OF GOD MOST HIGH, ACQUIRER (rt.: PNH)⁷⁵Apart from the context in the midrash, a traditional biblical translation would read: CREATOR. OF HEAVEN AND EARTH. And not only that, but you bowed down to Joseph, as stated (in Gen. 37:9): HERE WERE THE SUN, THE MOON, AND ELEVEN STARS BOWING DOWN TO ME. [So would you speak against me?] Ergo (in Josh. 10:12): O SUN, BE QUIET AT GIBEON. The sun said to Joshua: And so are you decreeing over me that I am to be quiet? He said to it: Yes. It said to him: Then who will speak the praise of the Holy One? You be quiet, and I will speak the praise of the Holy One, as stated (in Josh. 10:12): THEN (az) JOSHUA SPOKE TO THE LORD. Now az can only be a hymn, since it is stated (in Exod. 15:1): MOSES SANG THEN (az).⁷⁶THEN is understood as the object of the verb SANG. See above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 1:32; Exod. 4:12. (Mal. 1:11): AND IN EVERY PLACE INCENSE IS OFFERED TO MY NAME, < EVEN A PURE OBLATION >. R. Ammi asked R. Samuel bar Nahman: Is it correct that IN EVERY PLACE INCENSE IS OFFERED TO MY NAME?⁷⁷See Numb. R. 13:4. The Torah warns (in Deut. 12:13–14): TAKE HEED THAT YOU DO NOT OFFER UP YOUR BURNT OFFERINGS IN ANY PLACE THAT YOU SEE, BUT ONLY IN THE PLACE THAT < THE LORD > WILL CHOOSE…. So also it says (in Lev. 17:3–4): IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL SLAUGHTERS AN OX, A LAMB, OR A GOAT IN THE CAMP…, AND DOES NOT BRING IT UNTO THE ENTRANCE OF THE TENT OF MEETING…, < BLOODGUILT SHALL BE IMPUTED TO THAT PERSON >. But < there seems to be a contradiction when > the prophet says (in Mal. 1:11): AND IN EVERY PLACE INCENSE (muqtar) IS OFFERED TO MY NAME, < EVEN A PURE OBLATION >. R. Samuel bar Nahman said to him (i.e., to R. Ammi): What is A PURE OBLATION (minhah) which is burned (muqtar) IN EVERY PLACE and offered to the name of the Holy One?⁷⁸The Hebrew wording of this question reproduces almost exactly the wording in Mal. 1:11. This is the prayer of the afternoon service (minhah). INCENSE (muqtar) can only be the prayer of the afternoon service (minhah), since it is stated (in Ps. 141:2): LET MY PRAYER BE SET FORTH AS THE INCENSE BEFORE YOU…. [It also says] (in I Kings 18:36): AND IT CAME TO PASS AT THE TIME OF THE OFFERING OF THE OBLATION (minhah), < THE PROPHET > ELIJAH DREW NEAR < AND SAID >….⁷⁹Since Elijah carried out this minhah on mount Carmel, it could not have been a temple sacrifice. Thus here also minhah must refer to the afternoon service.

... “Moab is my washbasin…” (Tehillim 60:10) When Israel entered into their land in order to inherit it, the Holy One forbid them to conquer these three nations, as it says “Do not distress the Moabites…” (Devarim 2:9) So too regarding Edom it is written “You shall not provoke them…” (Devarim 2:5) From where do we learn that they were not to conquer the land of the Pelishtim? Because it is written “God did not lead them [by] way of the land of the Philistines for it was near…” (Shemot 12:17) The oath which Avraham swore to Avimelech was still near in time, “And now, swear to me here by God, that you will not lie to me or to my son or to my grandson…” (Bereshit 21:23) His grandson was still alive. In the future the Holy One will permit Israel to conquer all three, as it says “And they shall fly of one accord against the Philistines in the west, together they shall plunder the children of the East; upon Edom and Moab shall they stretch forth their hand, and the children of Ammon shall obey them.” (Yeshayahu 11:14) And it is translated as ‘they will join shoulder to shoulder as one to wipe out the Phillistines.’ Therefore it says “…Philistia, join me…” (Tehillim 60:10), Edom and Moav are their occupation as it says “Moab is my washbasin; on Edom I will throw my lock…” (ibid.)

Our Rabbis were taught concerning the passage (Deut. 12, 9) For ye are not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance, which the Lord your God giveth thee; i.e., to the rest, refers to Shiloh; and to the inheritance, refers to Jerusalem, and so says the verse (Jer. 12, 8) My heritage has become unto Me as a lion in the forest, and again the passage says (Ib.) Is My heritage unto Me as a speckled bird of prey? This is the opinion of R. Juda. R. Simon says: "Rest refers to Jerusalem and heritage refers to Shiloh, and so the verse reads (Ps. 132, 14) This is My resting place forever, and again it reads, For the Lord hath chosen Zion; He hath desired it for His habitation." It is easily understood according to the one who explains that rest refers to Shiloh that the verse says [first] to the rest and then to the heritage, but the one who explains that rest refers to Jerusalem and heritage refers to Shiloh, this reversed form should have been used in the passage, first heritage and then rest? Moses said thus [unto Israel]: "Not only are ye not as yet come unto rest [Jerusalem] but even unto the heritage [Shiloh] are ye not as yet come."

By five names is the soul/nefesh called: nefesh, ru’ach, n’shamah, chayah (living one), y’chidah (unique one). Nefesh – this is the blood . . . Ru’ach – for she rises and falls, [as in:] “Who knows if the ru’ach of human beings goes upward?” [Ec 3:21]. N’shamah – this is the visage/character/ofah. . . Chayah – that all the limbs die and (i.e., unless) she lives in the body. Y’chidah – that all the limbs are two by two [but] she is singular in the body.

[Another interpretation (of Lev. 17:3): IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL. This text is related (to Ps. 51:20–21 [18–19]): MAKE ZION PROSPER IN YOUR GOOD PLEASURE; REBUILD THE WALLS OF JERUSALEM. THEN YOU SHALL DELIGHT IN SACRIFICES OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, BURNT OFFERINGS, AND WHOLE OFFERINGS….⁸⁰Tanh., Lev. 6:10. To what is the matter comparable? To a rich and noble bachelor, who has no wife. His house was not < really > a house. Why? When the tenants came, he said to them: Go to the store. Why? Because he had neither house nor wife. He took a wife. He said to them: Whatever you bring me, from now on bring them up to the house. Thus all the days before Moses erected the tent of meeting, they offered sacrifices {from} [in] any place, as stated (in Exod. 24:5): THEN HE SENT YOUTHS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, AND THEY OFFERED BURNT OFFERINGS…. And so it says (in Exod. 8:23): LET US GO A DISTANCE OF THREE DAYS INTO THE WILDERNESS AND SACRIFICE TO THE LORD OUR GOD. When the Tabernacle was raised, the [Holy One] said to Moses: From now on you are only permitted to offer sacrifice in the Tent of Meeting; and there they offered up the {gifts} [gift]⁸¹Gk.: doron. to the Holy One. It is so stated (in Deut. 12:13–14): TAKE HEED THAT YOU DO NOT OFFER UP YOUR BURNT OFFERINGS [IN ANY PLACE THAT YOU SEE], BUT ONLY IN THE PLACE THAT THE LORD WILL CHOOSE [WITHIN ONE OF YOUR TRIBES. THERE SHALL YOU OFFER UP YOUR BURNT OFFERINGS]. And where did the Holy One choose? Jerusalem, as stated (in Ps. 132:13): FOR THE LORD HAS CHOSEN ZION; [HE HAS DESIRED IT FOR HIS DWELLING]. Moses therefore warns Israel, saying (in Lev. 17:3–4): IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL < SLAUGHTERS AN OX, A LAMB, OR A GOAT IN THE CAMP >…, AND DOES NOT BRING IT UNTO THE ENTRANCE OF THE TENT OF MEETING TO OFFER IT AS A SACRIFICE…, < BLOODGUILT SHALL BE IMPUTED TO THAT PERSON >.

“Moreover, I have seen, under the sun, in the place of judgment there is wickedness, and in the place of justice there is wickedness” (Ecclesiastes 3:16).
“Moreover, I have seen, under the sun, in the place of judgment…” – Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say: “In the place of judgment there is wickedness” – in the place where the Great Sanhedrin convenes and determine rulings for Israel, “there is wickedness,” as it is stated: “All the princes of the king of Babylon came and sat at the Middle Gate” (Jeremiah 39:3) – the place where the halakhot are determined.⁷⁰The word for Middle Gate [hatavekh] is similar to the term for determine [ḥotekh]. “There is wickedness,” there sat “Nergal Saretzer, Samgar Nevo, Sarsekhim the chief official; Nergal Saretzer the chief magician, and all the rest of the princes of the king of Babylon” (Jeremiah 39:3). The parable says: Where the master hung his weapon, the insolent shepherd hangs his jug.⁷¹The place formerly used for a glorious purpose has now been appropriated for an inglorious one. The Divine Spirit is screaming: “And in the place of justice, there is wickedness” – the place in whose regard it is stated: “Justice would lodge in it, but now murderers” (Isaiah 1:21), they commit murders. There they killed Zekharya and Uriya.⁷²Because Israel committed atrocities in the place that should have been set aside for justice, the members of the Great Sanhedrin were replaced in that location by conquering Babylonian officers.
Rabbi Yonatan raised a dilemma before Rabbi Aḥa: In which place did they kill Zekharya, in the Israelite courtyard or in the women’s courtyard? He said to him: Neither in the women’s courtyard nor in the Israelite courtyard, but rather in the priests’ courtyard. They did not treat his blood like the blood of a gazelle or like the blood of a deer. Regarding the blood of a deer and a gazelle it is written in the Torah: “He shall spill its blood and cover it with dirt” (Leviticus 17:13). But the righteous Zekharya, they did not treat his blood like the blood of a deer and a gazelle; rather they spilled it on the stones, as it is written: “For its blood was in its midst; it placed it upon a bare rock. [It did not pour it on the ground to cover it with dirt]” (Ezekiel 24:7). To what purpose? It was “to arouse fury to take vengeance, [I placed its blood upon the bare rock so it would not be covered]” (Ezekiel 24:8),⁷³God brought it about that Zekharya’s blood would not be covered in order to motivate the Babylonians to take vengeance upon the Israelites. and in that regard it is written: “Remember your Creator in the days of your youth” (Ecclesiastes 12:1).
You find that when Nevuzaradan ascended to destroy Jerusalem, the Holy One blessed be He had indicated to that blood that it should seethe and rise for two hundred and fifty-two years, from [the time of] Yoash to [the time of] Zedekiah. What did they do? They swept all possible dirt and formed every possible pile [upon it], but it would not rest; the blood was seething and boiling. The Holy One blessed be He said to the blood: ‘This is the time that you will collect your debt.’ When Nevuzaradan ascended and saw it, he said to them: ‘What is the nature of this blood that seethes in this way?’ They said to him: ‘It is the blood of bulls, rams, and sheep that they were slaughtering and sacrificing.’ He brought bulls, rams, and sheep and slaughtered them onto it, but it did not quiet, did not rest, and did not stop. He immediately took them and hanged them on a pole. He said to them: ‘Tell me what is the nature of this blood, and if not, I will comb you with a comb of iron.’ They said to him: ‘Since the Holy One blessed be He wishes to demand [vengeance for] His blood from us, we will reveal it to you.’ They said to him: ‘He was a priest, a prophet, and a judge, who would prophesy about us all these actions that you are performing against us. But we did not believe him and we rose against him and killed him for rebuking us.’
Immediately [Nevuzaradan] brought eighty thousand young priests and slaughtered them onto [the blood], but it did not rest. The blood emerged until it reached Zekharya’s grave. [Nevuzaradan] then brought the Great Sanhedrin and the lesser Sanhedrin and slaughtered them onto it, but it did not rest. At that moment, that wicked one [Nevuzaradan] came and shouted at the blood, and said to it: ‘What good are you, and in what way is your blood superior to the blood of these? Do you wish to eliminate your entire nation because of you?’ At that moment, the Holy One blessed be He became filled with mercy for them, and He said: ‘If this cruel wicked one, son of a wicked one, who ascended to destroy My house, became filled with mercy for them, I, of whom it is written: “The Lord, the Lord, God, merciful and gracious” (Exodus 34:6), and it is written in My regard: “The Lord is good to all, and His mercy is upon all His creations” (Psalms 145:9), all the more so.’ At that moment, the Holy One blessed be He intimated to that blood, and it was absorbed in its place.
Rabbi Yudan said: The Israelites performed seven transgressions at that moment:⁷⁴When they killed Zekharya. They killed a priest, a prophet, and a judge, they spilled innocent blood, they [brought] impurity to the [Temple] courtyard, and it was Shabbat and Yom Kippur.
Rabbi Yehoshua interpreted the verse regarding the sin of the Golden Calf. “In the place of judgment there is wickedness” – in the place where Moses implemented the attribute of justice, as it is stated: “Go to and fro from gate to gate in the camp [and each man kill his brother]” (Exodus 32:27). “There is wickedness,” as it is stated: “The Lord afflicted the people…” (Exodus 32:35). The Divine Spirit was shouting: “In the place of justice there is wickedness” – in the place where I treated them as righteous ones and called them divine, as it is stated: “I said: You are divine and all of you are sons of the celestial” (Psalms 82:6). “There is wickedness” – there they were corrupted and crafted the [Golden] Calf. As it is stated: “They prostrated themselves to it” (Exodus 32:8).
Rabbi Yuda interpreted the verse regarding Shitim. “In the place of judgment there is wickedness” – in the place where the attribute of justice acted in Shitim, as it is stated: “Take all the leaders of the people and hang them before the Lord against the sun” (Numbers 25:4). “There is wickedness,” as it stated: “The dead in the plague were twenty-four thousand” (Numbers 25:9). The Divine Spirit was shouting and saying: “And in the place of justice there is wickedness” – in the place where I treated them as righteous regarding the curses of Bilam, and I transformed them into blessings, as it is stated: “The Lord your God turned the curse into a blessing for you” (Deuteronomy 23:6), “there is wickedness,” there they corrupted and sinned, as it is stated: “Israel resided in Shitim [and the people began to engage in licentiousness]” (Numbers 25:1).
Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Yitzḥak, Rabbi Levi said two matters [are stated in verses] regarding the hand [of God], and two matters regarding the right hand [of God]. Two matters regarding the hand [of God], as it is written: “In whose hand is the life of every living being…” (Job 12:10), and it is written: “And My hand grasps judgment” (Deuteronomy 32:41). And two matters regarding the right hand [of God], as it is stated: “From His right hand, a fiery law to them” (Deuteronomy 33:2), and it is written: “Your right hand is filled with righteousness” (Psalms 48:11). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The Holy One blessed be He said to the soul: Soul, I strengthened you very much and commanded you, and said: “Just be strong not to eat the blood [because the blood is the soul]” (Deuteronomy 12:23), and [nonetheless the soul] goes out, violently robs, sins, and subjects itself to the attribute of justice, and emerges from the attribute of justice and sins,⁷⁵It sins again after receiving punishment for its previous sins. as it is stated: “Speak to the children of Israel saying: ‘If a soul sins unwittingly…’” (Leviticus 4:2).⁷⁶The verse assigns responsibility for even unwitting sins to the soul (Midrash HaMevo’ar). Alternatively, the verse may also be understood as a rhetorical question, as though to say: After all this, can a soul yet sin, even unwittingly? (Etz Yosef).

(Lev. 17:3:) IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL SLAUGHTERS. R. Aqiva says: When Israel was in the desert, they would slaughter cattle by stabbing and eat them; but here < Scripture > has forbidden them and says to them (ibid.): IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL…. ⁸³Tanh., Lev. 6:11; Lev. R. 22:7; see Hul. 16b-17a; Sifre, Deut. 12:20 (75).Then he told them: You are forbidden to slaughter apart from the Tent of Meeting (cf. vs. 4). R. Ishmael says: When Moses spoke to them, they were craving to eat meat. At that time they were cautioned⁸⁴Hizhiru ‘atsman. The verbal expression is used for an explicit biblical prohibition. away from slaughtering, i.e., not to slaughter apart from the Tent of Meeting. And why so? It is simply that up to then they had been lusting after idols. Where is it shown that they were lusting after idols? Where it is stated (in Lev. 17:7): AND THEY SHALL NO LONGER OFFER SACRIFICES < TO THE GOAT DEMONS AFTER WHOM THEY WENT WHORING >….⁸⁵Lev. R. 22:8. When they wished to enter the Land of Israel, they came to Moses. They said to him: O Our Master, If we wish to eat flesh, how shall we do so? He said to them: In the past, when you were in the desert, you were forbidden to slaughter apart from the Tent of Meeting; but when you enter the land, you are permitted to slaughter in any place, as stated (in Deut. 12:20): WHEN THE LORD YOUR GOD ENLARGES YOUR TERRITORY, AS HE PROMISED YOU, AND YOU SAY: LET ME EAT MEAT, BECAUSE YOUR SOUL LONGS TO EAT FLESH, < YOU MAY EAT FLESH TO YOUR SOUL'S DESIRE >. He said to them: When I shall have permitted you to slaughter, you may not take from your flock and slaughter. Solomon said (in Prov. 27:27): AND THERE WILL BE ENOUGH GOAT'S MILK FOR YOUR FOOD, FOR THE FOOD OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD. Moses was teaching Israel by saying to them: If you have sheep which you shear for your clothing, < then > as stated (in Prov. 27:26): THE SHEEP WILL BE FOR YOUR CLOTHES, AND THE HE-GOATS THE PRICE OF A FIELD. What is the meaning of AND THE HE-GOATS THE PRICE OF A FIELD? That whatever you gain from the goats, you are to buy fields with it.⁸⁶But cf. Hul. 84a. (Prov. 27:27): AND THERE WILL BE ENOUGH GOAT'S MILK. You will have enough GOAT'S MILK FOR YOUR FOOD, FOR THE FOOD⁸⁷The translation here follows the traditional biblical text, which Buber has just quoted correctly a few lines above; however, the Buber text here has substituted LWHM (“flesh”) for the biblical LHM (i.e., “food” or “bread”). OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD. R. Aqiva said: See how the Holy One cares for the assets of the righteous and Israel.⁸⁸The parallel in Tanh., Lev. 6:11 (Jerusalem: Eshkol, n.d.) reads: “of Israel’s righteous.” See what is written (in Deut. 12:21): THEN YOU MAY {TAKE} [SLAUGHTER] SOME OF YOUR CATTLE OR FLOCK. Some of what they bear.⁸⁹T‘Arakh. 4:26. You shall only take and sacrifice some of what they give birth to. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 15:19): < YOU SHALL CONSECRATE TO THE LORD > ALL THE MALE FIRSTLINGS WHICH ARE BORN IN YOUR HERD AND IN YOUR FLOCK. [You are permitted to sacrifice some of what they give birth to.] R. Eleazar [ben Azariah] said: The Torah has taught you a rule of conduct.⁹⁰T‘Arakh. 4:26; Hul. 84a. If someone from Israel should have ten pounds⁹¹Gk.: litrai. of silver, let him eat green vegetables in the pot; if he has twenty, let him eat them in a casserole;⁹²Gk.: lopas (“flat dish”). if he has thirty, let him eat a pound of meat from Sabbath to Sabbath; and if he has fifty, let him eat meat on each [and every] day. Now why all this? In order to care for the assets of Israel. R. Eleazar ben Shammua' said: And when he buys from Sabbath to Sabbath, he should not buy until he consults within his household. Where is it shown? < In Deut. 12:21. > Because it is so written (in Deut. 12:20): [WHEN THE LORD YOUR GOD ENLARGES YOUR TERRITORY,] AS HE PROMISED YOU, AND YOU SAY: LET ME EAT MEAT < BECAUSE YOUR SOUL LONGS TO EAT FLESH, YOU MAY EAT FLESH TO YOUR SOUL'S DESIRE >…. For this reason Moses warned them and gave them a hint (in vs. 21), so that they would not do too much slaughtering.

(Lev. 17:3:) IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL SLAUGHTERS. R. Aqiva says: When Israel was in the desert, they would slaughter cattle by stabbing and eat them; but here < Scripture > has forbidden them and says to them (ibid.): IF ANY SINGLE PERSON FROM THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL…. ⁸³Tanh., Lev. 6:11; Lev. R. 22:7; see Hul. 16b-17a; Sifre, Deut. 12:20 (75).Then he told them: You are forbidden to slaughter apart from the Tent of Meeting (cf. vs. 4). R. Ishmael says: When Moses spoke to them, they were craving to eat meat. At that time they were cautioned⁸⁴Hizhiru ‘atsman. The verbal expression is used for an explicit biblical prohibition. away from slaughtering, i.e., not to slaughter apart from the Tent of Meeting. And why so? It is simply that up to then they had been lusting after idols. Where is it shown that they were lusting after idols? Where it is stated (in Lev. 17:7): AND THEY SHALL NO LONGER OFFER SACRIFICES < TO THE GOAT DEMONS AFTER WHOM THEY WENT WHORING >….⁸⁵Lev. R. 22:8. When they wished to enter the Land of Israel, they came to Moses. They said to him: O Our Master, If we wish to eat flesh, how shall we do so? He said to them: In the past, when you were in the desert, you were forbidden to slaughter apart from the Tent of Meeting; but when you enter the land, you are permitted to slaughter in any place, as stated (in Deut. 12:20): WHEN THE LORD YOUR GOD ENLARGES YOUR TERRITORY, AS HE PROMISED YOU, AND YOU SAY: LET ME EAT MEAT, BECAUSE YOUR SOUL LONGS TO EAT FLESH, < YOU MAY EAT FLESH TO YOUR SOUL'S DESIRE >. He said to them: When I shall have permitted you to slaughter, you may not take from your flock and slaughter. Solomon said (in Prov. 27:27): AND THERE WILL BE ENOUGH GOAT'S MILK FOR YOUR FOOD, FOR THE FOOD OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD. Moses was teaching Israel by saying to them: If you have sheep which you shear for your clothing, < then > as stated (in Prov. 27:26): THE SHEEP WILL BE FOR YOUR CLOTHES, AND THE HE-GOATS THE PRICE OF A FIELD. What is the meaning of AND THE HE-GOATS THE PRICE OF A FIELD? That whatever you gain from the goats, you are to buy fields with it.⁸⁶But cf. Hul. 84a. (Prov. 27:27): AND THERE WILL BE ENOUGH GOAT'S MILK. You will have enough GOAT'S MILK FOR YOUR FOOD, FOR THE FOOD⁸⁷The translation here follows the traditional biblical text, which Buber has just quoted correctly a few lines above; however, the Buber text here has substituted LWHM (“flesh”) for the biblical LHM (i.e., “food” or “bread”). OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD. R. Aqiva said: See how the Holy One cares for the assets of the righteous and Israel.⁸⁸The parallel in Tanh., Lev. 6:11 (Jerusalem: Eshkol, n.d.) reads: “of Israel’s righteous.” See what is written (in Deut. 12:21): THEN YOU MAY {TAKE} [SLAUGHTER] SOME OF YOUR CATTLE OR FLOCK. Some of what they bear.⁸⁹T‘Arakh. 4:26. You shall only take and sacrifice some of what they give birth to. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 15:19): < YOU SHALL CONSECRATE TO THE LORD > ALL THE MALE FIRSTLINGS WHICH ARE BORN IN YOUR HERD AND IN YOUR FLOCK. [You are permitted to sacrifice some of what they give birth to.] R. Eleazar [ben Azariah] said: The Torah has taught you a rule of conduct.⁹⁰T‘Arakh. 4:26; Hul. 84a. If someone from Israel should have ten pounds⁹¹Gk.: litrai. of silver, let him eat green vegetables in the pot; if he has twenty, let him eat them in a casserole;⁹²Gk.: lopas (“flat dish”). if he has thirty, let him eat a pound of meat from Sabbath to Sabbath; and if he has fifty, let him eat meat on each [and every] day. Now why all this? In order to care for the assets of Israel. R. Eleazar ben Shammua' said: And when he buys from Sabbath to Sabbath, he should not buy until he consults within his household. Where is it shown? < In Deut. 12:21. > Because it is so written (in Deut. 12:20): [WHEN THE LORD YOUR GOD ENLARGES YOUR TERRITORY,] AS HE PROMISED YOU, AND YOU SAY: LET ME EAT MEAT < BECAUSE YOUR SOUL LONGS TO EAT FLESH, YOU MAY EAT FLESH TO YOUR SOUL'S DESIRE >…. For this reason Moses warned them and gave them a hint (in vs. 21), so that they would not do too much slaughtering.

(Exodus 23:18) "You shall not slaughter in the presence of chametz the blood of My sacrifice": You shall not slaughter the Pesach offering while chametz is still present. These are the words of R. Yishmael. R. Akiva says: This tells me only of slaughtering. Whence do I derive (the same for) sprinkling (of the blood)? From (Devarim 12:27) "the blood of your sacrifices," (which equates the sprinkling of the blood with the sacrificing.) R. Yehudah says ("My sacrifice") — the sacrifice which is all Mine (i.e., which is entirely consumed). Which is that? The (afternoon) tamid, (which may not be slaughtered on Pesach eve in the presence of chametz.)

"only to the L rd alone": Because others say: If the Israelites had not joined the name of the Holy One Blessed be He, with that of idolatry (i.e., the golden calf), they would have gone lost from the world, it is written "One who sacrifices to idolatry shall be put to death — only to the L rd alone!" R. Shimon b. Yochai says: Are not all who join the name of the Holy One Blessed be He to the name of idolatry liable to destruction! As it is written (II Kings 17:33) "They feared the L rd and served their (the nations') gods, according to the custom of the nations that exiled them from there." Others say: Torah was given with its signs (i.e., with its warnings), so that Israel not say: Though we are commanded against idolatry, it will not be held against us if we secrete the idols in the recesses of the earth. It is, therefore, written (Isaiah 2:14) "On all the high mountains and on all the lofty hills" (and in the recesses of the earth) — whether revealed or hidden, (idolatry is forbidden) — "only to the L rd alone" (with no admixtures of idolatry)!

"You shall not cook": This tells me only that cooking it is forbidden. Whence to I derive (the same for) eating it? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If the Pesach offering, which is not forbidden to be cooked, is forbidden to be eaten, meat and milk, which is forbidden to be cooked, how much more so may they not be eaten! __ No, this may be true of the Pesach offering, which may not be cooked in any liquid — wherefore it may not be eaten. Would you say the same for meat and milk, which (meat) is not forbidden, wherefore it should not be forbidden to be eaten? R. Akiva says: It need not be written (that eating meat and milk is forbidden), for it follows a fortiori, viz.: If the thigh sinew (gid hanasheh), which is not forbidden to be cooked, is forbidden to be eaten, then meat and milk, which is forbidden to be cooked, how much more so should it be forbidden to be eaten! __ No, this may be true of the thigh sinew, which was forbidden before the giving of the Torah, wherefore it is forbidden to be eaten, as opposed to meat and milk, which was not forbidden before the giving of the Torah, wherefore it should not be forbidden to be eaten. This is refuted by (the instance of) carrion, which, even though it was not forbidden before the giving of the Torah, is forbidden to be eaten. __ No, this may be true of carrion, which confers tumah by being carried, as opposed to meat and milk, which does not confer tumah by being carried! __ This is refuted by the instance of fats and blood, which, though they do not confer tumah by being carried are forbidden to be eaten, so that meat and milk, likewise, though it does not confer tumah by being carried, should be forbidden to be eaten. __ No, this (that they may not be eaten) may be true of fats and blood, which are liable to kareth, as opposed to meat and milk, which is not liable to kareth. It must, therefore, be written (Devarim 12:24) "You shall not eat it," to include meat and milk as forbidden to be eaten. Issi says (Ibid. 23) "You shall not eat the life with the flesh" — to include meat (cooked) in milk as forbidden to be eaten. Issi b. Guria says: "Holiness" is mentioned here (in respect to meat and milk [Devarim 14:21]), and "holiness" is mentioned elsewhere (Exodus 22:30) "And men of holiness shall you be unto Me, and flesh in the field, treifah (torn) you shall not eat." Just as there, eating is forbidden, so, here. This tells me only of the prohibition against eating. Whence do I derive the prohibition against the derivation of benefit? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If it is forbidden to derive benefit from arlah (the fruit of trees of the first three years), with which no transgression has been done, how much more so from meat cooked in milk, with which a transgression (the cooking) has been done! __ No, this may be true of arlah, which was never permitted, as opposed to meat and milk, which was permitted (before the cooking)! __ This is refuted by chametz on Pesach, which was permitted (before Pesach) and from which benefit may not be derived. __ No, this may be true of chametz on Pesach, which is liable to kareth (cutting-off), as opposed to (cooking) meat and milk, which is not liable to kareth. __ This is refuted by klai hakerem (forbidden hybridization of plants), which, though not liable to kareth is forbidden in the derivation of benefit. Rebbi says: It is written (Devarim 14:21) "… or sell it to the gentile. You shall not cook a kid in its mother's milk." Scripture hereby tells us: If you sell it, do not cook it and sell it — whence it is derived that it is forbidden in the derivation of benefit. "You shall not cook a kid, etc.": This tells me only of its mother's milk. Whence do I derive (the same for) its older sister's milk? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If it is forbidden to cook it in the milk of its mother, who does not enter the shed alone with it to be tithed, how much more so is it forbidden in the milk of its sister, who does enter the shed along with it to be tithed! Whence is (the same derived for cooking) its flesh in its own milk? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If re shechitah (slaughtering), where "fruit" with "fruit" is permitted (i.e., it is permitted to slaughter two siblings on the same day), "fruit" (child) with mother is forbidden, then here (re cooking) where "fruit" (child) with "fruit" (milk) is forbidden, how much more so is it forbidden to cook "fruit" (milk) with mother! Whence is (the same derived for cooking) the milk of goats with sheep? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If in reviah (mating of animals) where the Torah permitted "fruit" with mother (in cooking) it forbade "fruit" with (milk of) mother, then here where in reviah it forbade "fruit with fruit" (i.e., mating goat and sheep), how much more so does it forbid (in cooking) "fruit" with (milk of) mother! And this is, likewise, the halachah for cattle. Why, then, does Scripture speak (specifically) of a goat? Because a mother goat has a plentiful supply of milk. Rebbi says: It is written here "its mother," and elsewhere (Leviticus 22:27) "its mother." Just as there Scripture writes "ox, sheep, or goat," so here (these are intended).

..."Visiting (poked)" - visiting is always to remember. And so it states (Genesis 21:1), "And the Lord visited Sarah"; and it states (Exodus 3:16), "I will surely visit you." R. Yehudah says, "I gather together the iniquities with me, and suspend them until the fourth generation; as with Jehu, the son of Nimshi. Accordingly, it states [about him] (II Kings 15:12), "Four generations of your descendants shall occupy the throne of Israel." And so it was for him...

(Exodus 12:25) "And it shall be, when you come to the land": The service is contingent upon their entering the land and thereafter. (In the desert they were obliged to observe only one Pesach, in the second year, by Divine command.) "as He has spoken": And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 6:8) "and I shall bring you to the land, etc." Similarly, (Ibid. 16:23) "This is what the L rd has spoken: 'A resting, a holy Sabbath, etc.'" And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 5) "And it shall be on the sixth day that they shall prepare, etc." Similarly, (Leviticus 10:3) "This is as the L rd spoke: With My near ones I will be sanctified." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 29:43) "And I will be appointed there for the children of Israel and it (the mishkan) will be sanctified by My glory" (i.e., by My glorifiers). Similarly, (Devarim 11:25) "The L rd your G d will put the dread and fear of you over the whole land … as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 23:27) "My fright shall I send before you, and I shall confound all the people, etc." (Devarim 12:20) "When the L rd your G d broadens your boundary, as he spoke to you, etc." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 34:24) "for I shall drive out nations from before you and I shall broaden your boundary," (Ibid. 23:31) "And I shall set your boundary from the Red Sea, etc." Similarly, (Devarim 15:6) "for the L rd your G d will bless you as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 7:14) "Blessed shall you be over all other peoples." Similarly (Ibid. 26:18) "and the L rd has affirmed this day to make you His chosen people as He spoke to you." And where did He speak it? (Exodus 19:5) "then you shall be to Me chosen above all the peoples." Similarly (Devarim 26:19) "and to place you higher than all the nations … as He spoke." And whence did He speak it? (Ibid. 28:13) "And the L rd will make you the head, and not the tail. Similarly, (Isaiah 1:2) "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth, as the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:1) "Hear, O heavens, and I shall speak." Similarly, (Isaiah 40:5) "The glory of the L rd shall appear, and all flesh will behold as one, for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:39) "See, now, that I — I am He, and there is no god beside Me." Similarly, (Isaiah 1:19-20) "If you acquiesce and pay heed, the good of the earth will you eat. But if you refuse and rebel, the sword will devour you; for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Leviticus 26:25) "… I will bring against you an avenging sword, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 25:8) "He will destroy death forever … for the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:39) "I put to death and I bring to life, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 58:14) "then you will rejoice in the L rd, and I will 'ride' you on the heights of the earth, etc." And where did He speak it? (Devarim 32:13) "He will 'ride' him on the heights of the earth, etc." Similarly, (Ezekiel 39:8) "Behold, it has come; it has arrived, says the L rd G d. This is the day of which I spoke." And where did He speak of it? (Devarim 32:42) "I will make My arrows drunk with blood, etc." Similarly, (Michah 4:4) "and each man will sit under his grapevine … for the mouth of the L rd of hosts has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Leviticus 26:6) "And I will place peace in the land, etc." Similarly, (Ovadiah 1:18) "And there will be no survivor of the house of Esav, for the mouth of the L rd has spoken." And where did He speak it? (Numbers 24:18-19) "And Edom (Esav) will become an inheritance … and a victor will issue from Jacob and will destroy all trace of Ir." Similarly, (Genesis 21:1) "And the L rd remembered Sarah (for motherhood) as He had said." "And where did He say it? (Ibid. 17:19) "And G d said: But Sarah your wife will bear, etc." Similarly, (Ibid. 21:1) "And the L rd did for Sarah as He had spoken." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 15:4) "And the 'speaking' of the L rd was to him. This one (Ishmail) will not inherit you, etc." Similarly, (Yoel 4:8) "and I will sell your sons and your daughters, etc." And where did he speak it? (Genesis 9:25) "And he (Noach) said: Cursed is Canaan. A servant of servants will he be to his brothers." Similarly, (Devarim 17:16) "And the L rd said to you: You will not go back this way (to Egypt) again." And where did He say it? (Exodus 14:13) "For your seeing Egypt is (only) this day. You will see them no more forever." Similarly, (Isaiah 65:25) "The wolf and the lamb will graze together…said the L rd." And where did He say it? (Leviticus 26:6) "I will cut off wild beasts from the land." Similarly, (I Kings 11:2) "… of the nations of which the L rd said … You shall not come among them, etc." And where did He say it? (Devarim 7:3) "And you shall not intermarry with them, etc." Similarly, (I Kings 8:12) "The L rd has said that He will dwell in a thick cloud." And where did He say it? (Leviticus 16:2) "For in a thick cloud will I appear upon the (ark) cover." Similarly, (Malachi 3:17) "'and they will be Mine,' said the L rd." And where did He say it? (Exodus 19:5) "And you will be unto Me, chosen, etc." Similarly, (Yoel 3:5) "And all who call in the name of the L rd … as the L rd said." And where did He say it? (Devarim 28:10) "And all the peoples of the earth will see that the L rd's name is called upon you, etc." Similarly, (Isaiah 66:20-21) "And they will bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the L rd … And also from them will I take Cohanim and Levites, the L rd said." And where did He say this? (Devarim 29:28) "What is concealed (from us [e.g., who is a Cohein and who, a Levite]) is known to the L rd our G d." Here, too, (Exodus 12:25) "And it shall be, when you come to the land that the L rd will give you, as He has spoken, etc." And where did He speak it? (Ibid. 6:8) "And I shall bring you to the land, etc." (Exodus 12:26) "And it shall be, when your sons say to you, etc.": At that time, Israel was receiving bad tidings, that the Torah was destined to be forgotten. Others say they were receiving good tidings, that they were destined to see sons and sons of sons. (Exodus 12:27) "And the people bowed down and prostrated themselves": Why did they bow down? For it is written (Ibid. 13:18) "And the children of Israel went out of Egypt chamushim" — one out of five ("chamishah"). Others say one out of fifty ("chamishim"). And others say one out of five hundred ("chamesh me'oth"). R. Nehorai says; Upon my oath, not one in five hundred went out. For it is written (Ezekiel 16:7) "Numerous as the spouts of the field did I make you" (in Egypt), and (Exodus 1:7) "And the children of Israel were fruitful, and teemed" — One woman would bear six in one womb. And you say one in five hundred went out? And when did they die? In the three days of darkness, of which it is written (Exodus 10:23) "One man could not see another." The Jews buried their dead, and they were thankful and praised (the L rd) that their foes could not see (the dead) and rejoice in their downfall. (Ibid. 12:27) "Then you shall say that it is a Paschal sacrifice to the L rd.": R. Yossi Haglili said: The Jews would have deserved to die in Egypt (if not for the merit of the Paschal sacrifice) whereby the last of them consummated his sacrifice (and lived.) "Then you shall say that it is a Paschal sacrifice." We are hereby apprised that all who hear of or see the miracles that the Holy One Blessed be He wrought in Egypt must give praise. And thus is it written (Exodus 18:8-9) "And Moses related to his father-in-law all that the L rd did to Pharaoh and to Egypt. And Yithro rejoiced, etc." (Ibid. 28) "And the children of Israel went and they did": Reward is given for both the going and the doing. "and they did": Now did they already do? __ Their taking it upon themselves to do is regarded as their doing. "as the L rd commanded": We are hereby apprised of their eminence. Exactly as Moses and Aaron commanded them thus did they do. What is the intent of (the seemingly superfluous) "Thus did they do"? Moses and Aaron, too, did thus.

Rabbi Yehudah ben Shimon began, "'After the Lord your God shall you walk' (Deuteronomy 12:5). But is it possible for a man of flesh and blood to walk after the Holy One, blessed be He, the One about Whom it is written (Psalms 77:20), 'Your way is in the sea and Your path is in many waters?' And you say, 'After the Lord shall you walk?' 'And to Him shall you cling.' But is it possible for flesh and blood to go up to the Heavens and to cling to the Divine Presence, about Whom it is written (Deuteronomy 4:24), 'As the Lord, your God, is a consuming Fire,' and it is written (Daniel 7:9), 'His throne is sparks of fire,' and it is written (Daniel 7:10), 'A river of fire pulses and goes out before Him.' And you say, 'And to Him shall you cling?' But rather, the Holy One, blessed be He, from the very beginning of the creation of the world, only occupied Himself with plantation first. Hence it is written (Genesis 2:8), 'And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden.' You also, when you enter into the land, only occupy yourselves with plantation first. Hence it is written, 'When you shall come to the land.'"

(Exodus 22:29) "Thus shall you do with your ox": Just as with the first-born of an ox, miscarriages exempt (the next birth) from (the laws of) the first-born, so, with the first-born of a human being. Just as with the first-born of a human being you are permitted to redeem the first-born through any Cohein, wherever you wish, so, with the first-born of a beast, you are permitted to give it to any Cohein wherever you wish. Because it is written (Devarim 12:6) "And you shall bring there your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices … and the first-born of your herds and flocks," I might think that he must bring them (the first-born) to the Temple; it is, therefore, written (Exodus 13:2) "in man and beast, he (the first-born) is mine." The first-born of a beast is likened to the first-born of a human being, and the first-born of a human being, to the first-born of a beast. Just as with the first-born of a human being, you look after it for thirty days (before redeeming it), so, with the first-born of a beast, you look after it for thirty days (before giving it to the Cohein.)

(Bamidbar 6:27) "And they shall place My name": Why is this stated? It is written (Ibid. 23) "Thus shall you bless the children of Israel" — with the explicit Name (the Tetragrammaton). — But perhaps with an epithet (only). It is, therefore, written "And they shall place My name" — My distinctive name (Yod-Keh-Vav-Keh). I might think, even in the borders (of Jerusalem). It is, therefore, written here "And they shall place My name," and elsewhere (Devarim 12:5) "to place My name there." Just as there, the Temple; here, too, the Temple. In the sanctuary, with the explicit Name; in the province, with an epithet. "and I shall bless them": Why is this stated? (Ibid. 23) "Thus shall you bless, etc." tells us only of a blessing [by the Cohanim] to Israel. Whence do I derive a blessing for the Cohanim themselves? From "and I shall bless them." Variantly: "and I shall bless them": So that Israel not say that their blessings are dependent upon the Cohanim; it is written "and I shall bless them." So that the Cohanim not say We shall bless Israel, it is written "and I shall bless them." I shall bless My people Israel, as it is written (Devarim 2:7) "For the L-rd your G-d has blessed you in all the work of your hands," (15:6) "as He spoke to you," viz. (7:13) "And He will love you and bless you and multiply you, and bless etc.", and (28:12) "The L-rd will open for you His goodly treasure, the heavens," and (Ezekiel 34:14) "In a goodly pasture will I graze them," and (Ibid. 15) "I will feed My flock."

(Devarim 12:1) "These are the statutes": These are the medrashoth.

(Devarim 12:2) Whence is it derived that if an asheirah (a tree devoted to idolatry) were cut down and grew again it must be cut down again — even ten times? From "Destroy shall you destroy."

(Devarim 12:3) "And you shall raze their altars": This is an altar that was built originally for idolatry.

(Devarim 12:5) "But to the place that the L-rd your G-d will choose of all your tribes": by word of a prophet. I might think, wait until a prophet tells you; it is, therefore, written "His dwelling shall you seek and you shall come there": Seek to find it and then the prophet will tell you. And thus do we find with David (Psalms 132:1-5) "Remember, O L-rd, unto David, all of his affliction. How he swore to the L-rd, vowed to the Might of Jacob: I shall not go up to the bed that is spread for me; I shall not give sleep to my eyes, slumber to my eyelids, before I find a place for the L-rd, a resting place for the Might of Jacob." And whence is it derived that he wrought only by word of a prophet? From (II Samuel 24:18) "And Gad came to David on that day and said to him: Arise and set up an altar to the L-rd on the threshing floor of Aravna the Yevussi," and (II Chronicles 3:1) "And Solomon began building the Temple of the L-rd in Jerusalem on Mount Moriah, where He had appeared to his father David."

One verse (Devarim 12:14) states (that the Temple is to be built) "in (the portion of) one of your tribes," and, another (here) "of all your tribes." How are these two verses to be reconciled? Israel knew that the Temple was destined to be built in the portion of one of them — wherefore they set aside the "fat land" of Jericho. Who ate of it all of these years (until its building)? The descendants of Keini (Yithro), the father-in-law of Moses, ate of it four hundred and forty years. But with the building of the Temple, they left, viz. (Judges 1:16) "And the children of the Keini, the father-in-law of Moses went up from the city of palms (Jericho)." These are the words of R. Shimon. R. Yehudah says: They went to Yabetz, viz. ( Chronicles 2:55) "and the families of scribes, who dwelt in Yabetz … These were the Keinites, etc."

(Devarim 12:5) "and you shall come there … (6) and you shall bring there": Why is this stated (i.e., it is essentially stated elsewhere). Because it is written (Vayikra 23:37) "These are the festivals of the L-rd, which you shall call holy callings to present a fire-offering to the L-rd, a burnt-offering and a meal-offering, sacrifice and drink-offerings, the thing of the day in its day."

(Devarim 12:5) "and you shall come there … (6) and you shall bring there": Why is this stated (i.e., it is essentially stated elsewhere). Because it is written (Vayikra 23:37) "These are the festivals of the L-rd, which you shall call holy callings to present a fire-offering to the L-rd, a burnt-offering and a meal-offering, sacrifice and drink-offerings, the thing of the day in its day."

(Devarim 12:7) "And you shall eat there before the L-rd your G-d": It is found that there were two precincts (for eating), one for holy of holies, and one for lower-order offerings.

(Devarim 12:8) "You shall not do as all that we do here today": As long as the mishkan (the tabernacle) had not been established, the bamoth (individual altars) were permitted, and the (sacrificial) service was performed by the first-born. When the mishkan was established, the bamoth were forbidden and the service was performed by the Cohanim.

(Devarim 12:9) "For you have not as yet come": to be permitted (again to sacrifice) on a bamah.

(Devarim 12:10) "And you will cross the Jordan and you will dwell in the land … (11) and the place that the L-rd your G-d will choose, etc." R. Yehudah says: Three mitzvoth were commanded to Israel upon their entrance to the land: to appoint a king over them, to build the Temple, and to cut off the seed of Amalek,

(Devarim 12:11) "then the place that the L-rd your G-d shall choose to repose His name therein, there shall you bring … your burnt-offerings": both individual and communal burnt-offerings. "and your sacrifices": sacrifices of individual peace-offerings and of communal burnt-offerings.

(Devarim 12:12) "And you shall rejoice": It is written here "rejoicing," and, elsewhere (27:7) "rejoicing." Just as the "rejoicing" there is with peace-offerings, so, the "rejoicing" here.

(Devarim 12:13) "Take heed unto yourselves": a negative commandment.

(Devarim 12:15) "Only with all the desire of your soul shall you slaughter": Of what is Scripture speaking here? If of "lust-flesh" (i.e., slaughtering a non-consecrated animal for food), this is spoken of elsewhere (20); and if of the eating of consecrated flesh, this has already been spoken of (as being permitted only in Jerusalem, whereas here it is written "in all of your gates"). It must be speaking, then, of consecrated animals (which had sustained a blemish) and were redeemed (and were to be eaten in "all of your gates").

(Devarim 12:17) "You shall not be able to eat in your gates": R. Yehoshua b. Karchah says (in respect to "able"): I am able, but not permitted. A cognate instance is (Joshua 15:63) "But the Yevussi, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, they could not drive out": They could but they were not permitted to do so.

(Devarim 12:17) "your cattle and your flocks": This refers to sin-offerings and guilt-offerings. What does Scripture come to tech us? If (that it is forbidden) to eat sin-offerings and guilt-offerings outside the wall, this can be derived a fortiori from ma'aser. If that (they may not) be eaten before their blood is sprinkled, this may be derived a fortiori from thank and peace-offerings (lower-order offerings). If that a non-priest (may not eat of them) even after their blood had been sprinkled, this may be derived a fortiori from bechor, viz.: If bechor, a lower-order offering — if one eats of it (even) after its blood has been sprinkled, he transgresses a negative commandment, then sin and guilt-offerings, if one eats of them (even) after their blood has been sprinkled, how much more so does he transgress a negative commandment! The purpose of the verse, then, must be to teach us that if one eats a sin or guilt-offering outside the curtains (of the tabernacle) he transgresses a negative commandment.

(Devarim 12:17) "and all your vows": This refers to burnt-offerings. What does Scripture come to teach us? If (that it is forbidden) to eat of a burnt-offering outside of the wall, this can be derived a fortiori from ma'aser. If (that it is forbidden) to eat of it before the sprinkling of blood, this can be derived a fortiori from sin and peace-offerings. If (that it is forbidden to eat of it) after the sprinkling of its blood, this can be derived a fortiori from bechor. (If that it is forbidden to eat of it) outside the curtains, this can be derived from sin and guilt-offerings, viz.: If sin and guilt-offerings, which are permitted to be eaten — if one eats of them outside the curtains, he transgresses a positive commandment, then a burnt-offering, which is forbidden to be eaten — if one eats of it outside of the curtains, how much more so does he transgress a positive commandment! The purpose of the verse, then, must be to teach us that if a Cohein eats of a burnt-offering, whether before or after the sprinkling of its blood, whether within or outside the curtains, he transgresses a negative commandment (for the burnt-offering must be completely burned).

(Devarim 12:20) "When the L-rd your G-d broadens your boundaries": Observe the mitzvah prescribed herein, in whose merit the L-rd shall broaden your boundaries.

"and you will say: I shall eat flesh, for your soul will desire to eat flesh": R. Yishmael says: We are hereby apprised that "flesh of desire" was forbidden to Israel in the desert, and when they came to Eretz Yisrael it was permitted to them.

(Devarim 12:23) "Only strengthen yourself not to eat the blood": R. Yehudah says: We are hereby taught that they were "steeped" in blood before the giving of the Torah.

(Devarim 12:26) "Only your consecrated things which shall be to you, etc.": Of what is Scripture speaking here? If his consecrations in Eretz Yisrael, this has already been stated (viz. Ibid. 10). It must be speaking, then, of his consecrations outside of the land.

(Devarim 12:27) "And you shall offer your burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood": R. Yehoshua says: If there is no blood, there is no flesh; if there is no flesh, there is no blood. (i.e., if the flesh has become invalidated, the blood is not to be sprinkled; and if the blood has become invalidated, the sacrifice is invalidated.)

(Devarim 12:28) "Take heed and hearken": If you take heed just a little, in the end you will hearken much. If you take heed of what you have heard, in the end you will take heed of what you have not heard. If you take heed of what you have now, in the end you will take heed of what you are destined to have.

(Devarim 12:29) "When the L-rd your G-d will cut off the nations": Do the mitzvah stated herein, in reward for which the L-rd your G-d will cut off the nations.

(Devarim 12:30) "Take heed unto yourselves": a negative commandment. "lest they be a stumbling block to you": a negative commandment.

(Bamidbar 18:15) "All that opens the womb of all flesh": I would think an animal, too, is included (in redemption of the first-born); it is, therefore, written "which they offer to the L-rd" (as a sacrifice) — to exclude an animal (as opposed to a beast, which is not offered). This ("which they offer") implies that both an animal and a blemished (beast) are excluded (from redemption); it is, therefore, written ("in man) and in beast" — to include a blemished (beast) in redemption, (as a blemished man is included). "in man and in beast"; What obtains with the man (i.e., redemption) obtains with his beast" — to exclude Levites: Redemption not obtaining with them, it does not obtain with their (unclean) beast (i.e., an ass). And the first-born of a man is likened to the first-born of a beast, and the first-born of a best to the first-born of a man. Just as with the first-born of a beast, a miscarriage is exempt from the mitzvah of the first-born, so, with the first-born of a man. Just as the (redemption money) for a man is given to a Cohein in whichever place he (the man) wishes, so, he may give the first-born of a beast to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes. For I would think that since it is written (Devarim 12:6) "And you shall bring there (to the Temple) your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices," then even if he were distant from it, he must exert himself and bring it (the first-born beast) to the Temple; it is, therefore, written "in man and in beast." Just as the redemption money for a man may be given to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes, so, he may give the first-born of a beast to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes. And just as the first-born of a man must be cared for for thirty days (before redemption [viz. Bamidbar 18:16]), so, the first-born of a beast. (Ibid. 15) "but redeem shall you redeem": This is what was asked in Kerem Beyavneh before the sages: If a first-born (beast) dies, is it to be redeemed and fed to the dogs? R. Tarfon expounded, "but redeem shall you redeem, etc." You redeem the unclean (beast, i.e., an ass), and you do not redeem the clean, neither alive nor dead. "and the first-born of the unclean beast shall you redeem": I would think that this applied to all the unclean beasts; it is, therefore, written (Shemot 13:13) "And every first-born of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep" — You redeem an ass, but you do not redeem the first-born of any other unclean beast. I might think that the first-born of an ass is redeemed with a sheep, and the first-born of all other unclean beasts, with clothing and vessels; it is, therefore, written again (Shemot 34:20) "And the first-born of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep." The first-born of an ass you redeem with a sheep, but the first-born of all other unclean beasts you do not redeem at all. If so, what is the intent of (Bamidbar 18:15) "the first-born of the unclean beast you shall redeem"? If it does not apply to the first-born, understand it as applying to dedication to Temple maintenance, an unclean beast being dedicated to Temple maintenance, whence it is then redeemed (viz. Vayikra 27:27). (Bamidbar 18:15) ("And the first-born of the unclean beast) shall you redeem": immediately. You say, immediately, but perhaps the intent is after some time (i.e., after thirty days). It is, therefore, (to negate this) written (Ibid. 16) "And his redemption (that of a human first-born), from one month shall you redeem." The first-born of a man is redeemed with five shekalim and is redeemed after (one month's) time; but the first-born of an ass is redeemed immediately or at any time (thereafter). "And his redemption, from one month shall you redeem": "money, five shekalim" tells me only of money. Whence do I derive (the same for something that has) the value of money? From "And his redemption, etc." I might think, (his redemption) with anything. It is, therefore, written "And his redemption" — general; "money, five shekalim" — particular. "general-particular." (The rule is) there is in the general only what is in the particular (i.e., "money," literally). "you shall redeem" — again general. — But perhaps it (the particular) reverts to the first "general" (viz. Shemot 13:13) "And every first-born of man among your sons you shall redeem," (so that we have an instance of general particular.) Would you say that? (i.e., This is unlikely because the particular is too far removed from that "general.") We have, then, an instance of general-particular-general (as stated above). And (the rule is:) We follow the nature of the particular, viz.: Just as the particular is movable property, worth money, so, the general is of that nature — whence they ruled: The first-born of a man may be redeemed with all things, except with bondsmen, writs, and land. Rebbi says: The first-born of a man may be redeemed with all things, except with writs. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "It is twenty gerah": What is the intent of this? (i.e., it is already written [Vayikra 27:25] "Twenty gerah shall the shekel be.") Whence is it derived that if he wishes to increase (the amount) he may do so? From "it shall be." I might think that if he wishes to decrease, he may do so. It is, therefore, written "shall be." (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "But the first-born of an ox": It must look like an ox. "a sheep": It must look like a sheep. "a goat": It must look like a goat — to exclude a hybrid or a nidmeh (superficially similar). "you shall not redeem": I might think that if he redeemed it, it remains redeemed; it is, therefore, written "They are consecrated." R. Yoshiyah says: Why is this ("they are consecrated") written? (i.e., it is already written [Shemot 13:2] "Consecrate unto Me every first-born") To include a (beast-) tithe and the Paschal lamb as requiring one spilling (of blood on the altar), something which was not spelled out in all of the Torah. R. Yitzchak says: This (derivation) is not needed. For it is already written (Devarim 12:27) "and the blood of your sacrifices shall be spilled out" — to include the tithe and the Pesach as requiring one spilling. What, then, is the intent of "They are consecrated"? To include the tithe and the Pesach as requiring smoking of the fats, something which was not spelled out in all of the Torah. Abba Channan says in the name of R. Eliezer: This (derivation) is not needed. For it follows a fortiori, viz.: If other offerings, which are not similar in their applications of blood, are similar in their smoking of fats, then the tithe and the Pesach, which are similar (in a first-born) in their application of blood, how much more so should they be similar in their smoking of fats! What, then, is the intent of "They are consecrated"? What we have mentioned heretofore (i.e., to include tithe and Pesach as requiring one spilling of blood). "Their blood shall you sprinkle upon the altar": one application. You say one application, but perhaps (the intent is) two applications that are four (i.e., one on the north-east corner and one on the south-west corner.) — Would you say that? If in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where fats are increased (viz. Vayikra 3:2), blood is decreased (i.e., only two applications that are four), then here (with first-born, tithe and Pesach), where fats are decreased, how much more so should blood be decreased (to only one application)! Or, conversely, if in a place (first-born, tithe, and Pesach), where fats are decreased, blood is increased (to two applications that are four), then in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where fats are increased, how much more so should blood be increased (to more than two applications that are four)! It is, therefore, written (of the other offerings) (Vayikra 1:11) "And the Cohanim" shall sprinkle … roundabout" — two applications that are four. I have reasoned a fortiori and adduced the converse. The converse has been rejected and I return to the original a fortiori argument, viz.: If in a place where fats are increased, blood is decreased, then here, where fats are decreased, how much more so should blood be decreased (to only one application)! What, then, is the intent of "Their blood shall you sprinkle"? One application. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "and their fats shall you smoke": Does Scripture speak of an (even) layer of fat (covered with) a membrane and (easily) peeled, or also with the fats of the rib cage? — Would you say that? If in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where blood is increased, fats are decreased, (the rib-cage fats, not being smoked) — then here, (vis-à-vis the first-born, where blood is decreased, how much more so should fats be decreased! How, then, am I to understand "and their fats shall you smoke"? As referring to an (even) layer of fat (covered with) a membrane and (easily) peeled. "a fire-offering": Even though you consign it to the wood pile, it is not acceptable until it is consumed by the fire. "a sweet savor to the L-rd": It is My pleasure that I have spoken and My will has been done. (Ibid. 18) "And their flesh shall be for you as the wave-breast": Scripture came and likened first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings. Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born is eaten for two days and one night. This question was asked before the sages in Kerem Beyavneh: For how long is first-born eaten? R. Tarfon answered and said: For two days and one night. There was a certain disciple there, who had come to serve in the house of study first, R. Yossi Haglili by name. He asked him: My master, how do you know this? R. Tarfon: First-born is kodshim (consecrated) and peace-offerings are kodshim. Just as peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born. R. Yossi: My master, a sin-offering is a gift to the Cohein, and a first-born is a gift to the Cohein. Just as a sin-offering is eaten for one day and one night, so, a first-born. R. Tarfon: My son, I will learn a thing from a thing, and I will derive a thing from a thing. I will learn a thing that is a lower-order offering (first-born) from a thing which is a lower-order offering (peace-offerings), and I will not learn a thing which is a lower-order offering from a thing which is holy of holies (a sin-offering). R. Yossi: My master, I will learn a thing from a thing and I will derive a thing from a thing. I will learn a thing which is a gift to the Cohein (first-born) from a thing which is a gift to the Cohein (sin-offering), and I will not learn a thing which is a gift to the Cohein from a thing which is not a gift to the Cohein (peace-offerings). R. Tarfon kept quiet and R. Akiva jumped up and said to him: My son, this is how I expound it; "and its flesh shall be for you as the wave-breast." Scripture came and likened first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings. Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so first-born. R. Yossi: You liken it to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings, and I liken it to breast and shoulder of thank-offerings. Just as these are eaten for one day and one night, (viz. Vayikra 7:16) so, first-born. R. Akiva: My son, this is how I expound it: "And their flesh shall be for you as wave-breast." There is no need to add (Ibid.) "for you shall it be." It ("for you shall it be') is adding another "being" (of one day), that it (first-born) be eaten for two days and one night (— like peace-offerings, and not like thank-offerings). R. Yishmael said: Now where is thank-offering derived from (i.e., that breast and shoulder be given to the Cohanim)? Is it not from (its being likened to) peace-offerings? And something (i.e., first-born), which is derived from something else (i.e., peace-offerings), you (R. Yossi) would come and liken it (first-born) to something else (i.e., thank-offerings, that it [first-born] be eaten for one day and one night as thank-offerings are)? Would you learn something (i.e., that first-born be eaten for one day and one night) from something (thank-offering), which is itself learned from something else (i.e., peace-offerings)? (In sum,) you are not to learn as per the latter version (that of R. Yossi), but as per the former version, viz.: "And their flesh (that of first-born) shall be for you, etc." Scripture hereby comes to liken first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings — Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born is eaten for two days and one night. What, then, is the intent of (the redundant) "for you shall it be"? To include a blemished first-born as reverting to the Cohein, something which was not spelled out in the all of the Torah. R. Elazar says: (A first-born may be eaten) for two days and one night. You say for two days and one night, but perhaps it is for a day and a night? It is, therefore, written (Devarim 15:20) "Before the L-rd your G-d shall you eat it (the first-born), year in year," which implies that it may be eaten for two days and one night (i.e., the last day of the preceding year and the first day of the next year and the intervening night). (Bamidbar, Ibid. 19) "All the terumah of the holy things, which the children of Israel will separate": There are sections which generalize in the beginning and specify at the end; (others) which specify in the beginning and generalize at the end; and this one generalizes in the beginning (18:8) and generalizes at the end, (here, 18:19), and specifies in the middle. "have I given to you and to your sons and to your daughters with you as an everlasting statute": that it continue for all the succeeding generations. "It is a covenant of salt forever before the L-rd": Scripture forged a covenant with Aaron with something (salt), which preserves, and which, furthermore, preserves other things.

(Bamidbar 18:15) "All that opens the womb of all flesh": I would think an animal, too, is included (in redemption of the first-born); it is, therefore, written "which they offer to the L-rd" (as a sacrifice) — to exclude an animal (as opposed to a beast, which is not offered). This ("which they offer") implies that both an animal and a blemished (beast) are excluded (from redemption); it is, therefore, written ("in man) and in beast" — to include a blemished (beast) in redemption, (as a blemished man is included). "in man and in beast"; What obtains with the man (i.e., redemption) obtains with his beast" — to exclude Levites: Redemption not obtaining with them, it does not obtain with their (unclean) beast (i.e., an ass). And the first-born of a man is likened to the first-born of a beast, and the first-born of a best to the first-born of a man. Just as with the first-born of a beast, a miscarriage is exempt from the mitzvah of the first-born, so, with the first-born of a man. Just as the (redemption money) for a man is given to a Cohein in whichever place he (the man) wishes, so, he may give the first-born of a beast to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes. For I would think that since it is written (Devarim 12:6) "And you shall bring there (to the Temple) your burnt-offerings and your sacrifices," then even if he were distant from it, he must exert himself and bring it (the first-born beast) to the Temple; it is, therefore, written "in man and in beast." Just as the redemption money for a man may be given to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes, so, he may give the first-born of a beast to a Cohein in whichever place he wishes. And just as the first-born of a man must be cared for for thirty days (before redemption [viz. Bamidbar 18:16]), so, the first-born of a beast. (Ibid. 15) "but redeem shall you redeem": This is what was asked in Kerem Beyavneh before the sages: If a first-born (beast) dies, is it to be redeemed and fed to the dogs? R. Tarfon expounded, "but redeem shall you redeem, etc." You redeem the unclean (beast, i.e., an ass), and you do not redeem the clean, neither alive nor dead. "and the first-born of the unclean beast shall you redeem": I would think that this applied to all the unclean beasts; it is, therefore, written (Shemot 13:13) "And every first-born of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep" — You redeem an ass, but you do not redeem the first-born of any other unclean beast. I might think that the first-born of an ass is redeemed with a sheep, and the first-born of all other unclean beasts, with clothing and vessels; it is, therefore, written again (Shemot 34:20) "And the first-born of an ass you shall redeem with a sheep." The first-born of an ass you redeem with a sheep, but the first-born of all other unclean beasts you do not redeem at all. If so, what is the intent of (Bamidbar 18:15) "the first-born of the unclean beast you shall redeem"? If it does not apply to the first-born, understand it as applying to dedication to Temple maintenance, an unclean beast being dedicated to Temple maintenance, whence it is then redeemed (viz. Vayikra 27:27). (Bamidbar 18:15) ("And the first-born of the unclean beast) shall you redeem": immediately. You say, immediately, but perhaps the intent is after some time (i.e., after thirty days). It is, therefore, (to negate this) written (Ibid. 16) "And his redemption (that of a human first-born), from one month shall you redeem." The first-born of a man is redeemed with five shekalim and is redeemed after (one month's) time; but the first-born of an ass is redeemed immediately or at any time (thereafter). "And his redemption, from one month shall you redeem": "money, five shekalim" tells me only of money. Whence do I derive (the same for something that has) the value of money? From "And his redemption, etc." I might think, (his redemption) with anything. It is, therefore, written "And his redemption" — general; "money, five shekalim" — particular. "general-particular." (The rule is) there is in the general only what is in the particular (i.e., "money," literally). "you shall redeem" — again general. — But perhaps it (the particular) reverts to the first "general" (viz. Shemot 13:13) "And every first-born of man among your sons you shall redeem," (so that we have an instance of general particular.) Would you say that? (i.e., This is unlikely because the particular is too far removed from that "general.") We have, then, an instance of general-particular-general (as stated above). And (the rule is:) We follow the nature of the particular, viz.: Just as the particular is movable property, worth money, so, the general is of that nature — whence they ruled: The first-born of a man may be redeemed with all things, except with bondsmen, writs, and land. Rebbi says: The first-born of a man may be redeemed with all things, except with writs. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "It is twenty gerah": What is the intent of this? (i.e., it is already written [Vayikra 27:25] "Twenty gerah shall the shekel be.") Whence is it derived that if he wishes to increase (the amount) he may do so? From "it shall be." I might think that if he wishes to decrease, he may do so. It is, therefore, written "shall be." (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "But the first-born of an ox": It must look like an ox. "a sheep": It must look like a sheep. "a goat": It must look like a goat — to exclude a hybrid or a nidmeh (superficially similar). "you shall not redeem": I might think that if he redeemed it, it remains redeemed; it is, therefore, written "They are consecrated." R. Yoshiyah says: Why is this ("they are consecrated") written? (i.e., it is already written [Shemot 13:2] "Consecrate unto Me every first-born") To include a (beast-) tithe and the Paschal lamb as requiring one spilling (of blood on the altar), something which was not spelled out in all of the Torah. R. Yitzchak says: This (derivation) is not needed. For it is already written (Devarim 12:27) "and the blood of your sacrifices shall be spilled out" — to include the tithe and the Pesach as requiring one spilling. What, then, is the intent of "They are consecrated"? To include the tithe and the Pesach as requiring smoking of the fats, something which was not spelled out in all of the Torah. Abba Channan says in the name of R. Eliezer: This (derivation) is not needed. For it follows a fortiori, viz.: If other offerings, which are not similar in their applications of blood, are similar in their smoking of fats, then the tithe and the Pesach, which are similar (in a first-born) in their application of blood, how much more so should they be similar in their smoking of fats! What, then, is the intent of "They are consecrated"? What we have mentioned heretofore (i.e., to include tithe and Pesach as requiring one spilling of blood). "Their blood shall you sprinkle upon the altar": one application. You say one application, but perhaps (the intent is) two applications that are four (i.e., one on the north-east corner and one on the south-west corner.) — Would you say that? If in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where fats are increased (viz. Vayikra 3:2), blood is decreased (i.e., only two applications that are four), then here (with first-born, tithe and Pesach), where fats are decreased, how much more so should blood be decreased (to only one application)! Or, conversely, if in a place (first-born, tithe, and Pesach), where fats are decreased, blood is increased (to two applications that are four), then in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where fats are increased, how much more so should blood be increased (to more than two applications that are four)! It is, therefore, written (of the other offerings) (Vayikra 1:11) "And the Cohanim" shall sprinkle … roundabout" — two applications that are four. I have reasoned a fortiori and adduced the converse. The converse has been rejected and I return to the original a fortiori argument, viz.: If in a place where fats are increased, blood is decreased, then here, where fats are decreased, how much more so should blood be decreased (to only one application)! What, then, is the intent of "Their blood shall you sprinkle"? One application. (Bamidbar, Ibid.) "and their fats shall you smoke": Does Scripture speak of an (even) layer of fat (covered with) a membrane and (easily) peeled, or also with the fats of the rib cage? — Would you say that? If in a place (i.e., with other offerings), where blood is increased, fats are decreased, (the rib-cage fats, not being smoked) — then here, (vis-à-vis the first-born, where blood is decreased, how much more so should fats be decreased! How, then, am I to understand "and their fats shall you smoke"? As referring to an (even) layer of fat (covered with) a membrane and (easily) peeled. "a fire-offering": Even though you consign it to the wood pile, it is not acceptable until it is consumed by the fire. "a sweet savor to the L-rd": It is My pleasure that I have spoken and My will has been done. (Ibid. 18) "And their flesh shall be for you as the wave-breast": Scripture came and likened first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings. Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born is eaten for two days and one night. This question was asked before the sages in Kerem Beyavneh: For how long is first-born eaten? R. Tarfon answered and said: For two days and one night. There was a certain disciple there, who had come to serve in the house of study first, R. Yossi Haglili by name. He asked him: My master, how do you know this? R. Tarfon: First-born is kodshim (consecrated) and peace-offerings are kodshim. Just as peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born. R. Yossi: My master, a sin-offering is a gift to the Cohein, and a first-born is a gift to the Cohein. Just as a sin-offering is eaten for one day and one night, so, a first-born. R. Tarfon: My son, I will learn a thing from a thing, and I will derive a thing from a thing. I will learn a thing that is a lower-order offering (first-born) from a thing which is a lower-order offering (peace-offerings), and I will not learn a thing which is a lower-order offering from a thing which is holy of holies (a sin-offering). R. Yossi: My master, I will learn a thing from a thing and I will derive a thing from a thing. I will learn a thing which is a gift to the Cohein (first-born) from a thing which is a gift to the Cohein (sin-offering), and I will not learn a thing which is a gift to the Cohein from a thing which is not a gift to the Cohein (peace-offerings). R. Tarfon kept quiet and R. Akiva jumped up and said to him: My son, this is how I expound it; "and its flesh shall be for you as the wave-breast." Scripture came and likened first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings. Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so first-born. R. Yossi: You liken it to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings, and I liken it to breast and shoulder of thank-offerings. Just as these are eaten for one day and one night, (viz. Vayikra 7:16) so, first-born. R. Akiva: My son, this is how I expound it: "And their flesh shall be for you as wave-breast." There is no need to add (Ibid.) "for you shall it be." It ("for you shall it be') is adding another "being" (of one day), that it (first-born) be eaten for two days and one night (— like peace-offerings, and not like thank-offerings). R. Yishmael said: Now where is thank-offering derived from (i.e., that breast and shoulder be given to the Cohanim)? Is it not from (its being likened to) peace-offerings? And something (i.e., first-born), which is derived from something else (i.e., peace-offerings), you (R. Yossi) would come and liken it (first-born) to something else (i.e., thank-offerings, that it [first-born] be eaten for one day and one night as thank-offerings are)? Would you learn something (i.e., that first-born be eaten for one day and one night) from something (thank-offering), which is itself learned from something else (i.e., peace-offerings)? (In sum,) you are not to learn as per the latter version (that of R. Yossi), but as per the former version, viz.: "And their flesh (that of first-born) shall be for you, etc." Scripture hereby comes to liken first-born to breast and shoulder of peace-offerings — Just as breast and shoulder of peace-offerings are eaten for two days and one night, so, first-born is eaten for two days and one night. What, then, is the intent of (the redundant) "for you shall it be"? To include a blemished first-born as reverting to the Cohein, something which was not spelled out in the all of the Torah. R. Elazar says: (A first-born may be eaten) for two days and one night. You say for two days and one night, but perhaps it is for a day and a night? It is, therefore, written (Devarim 15:20) "Before the L-rd your G-d shall you eat it (the first-born), year in year," which implies that it may be eaten for two days and one night (i.e., the last day of the preceding year and the first day of the next year and the intervening night). (Bamidbar, Ibid. 19) "All the terumah of the holy things, which the children of Israel will separate": There are sections which generalize in the beginning and specify at the end; (others) which specify in the beginning and generalize at the end; and this one generalizes in the beginning (18:8) and generalizes at the end, (here, 18:19), and specifies in the middle. "have I given to you and to your sons and to your daughters with you as an everlasting statute": that it continue for all the succeeding generations. "It is a covenant of salt forever before the L-rd": Scripture forged a covenant with Aaron with something (salt), which preserves, and which, furthermore, preserves other things.

I might think that if one sacrificed (contrary to the prescribed order) a burnt-offering before a sin-offering, a Pesach offering before a daily offering (tamid), additional offerings (mussafim) before daily offerings, he transgresses a negative commandment; it is, therefore, written "You shall not sacrifice to the L-rd your G-d an ox or a sheep in which there is a blemish." For this he transgresses a negative commandment and not for the others.

(Bamidbar 29:39) "These shall you offer to the L-rd on your festivals, aside from, etc.": These are the vows and the gift-offerings that he vows on the festival, that he is to bring them on the festival. You say this, but perhaps Scripture speaks of the vows and the thank-offerings of the whole year? (This is not so, for Devarim 12:5-6) "And you shall come there and you shall bring there … your vows and your gifts" already speaks of the vows and gifts of the whole year. How, then, am I to understand "These shall you offer to the L-rd on your festivals"? As referring to the vows and the gift-offerings that he vows on the festival, that they are to be brought on the festival. "aside from your vows" These are the bird-pairs of the zavim and the zavoth (those with a genital flow), which (bird-pairs) the Torah permitted to be brought on a festival. "aside from your vows … (31) And Moses said to the children of Israel": (The purpose of "And Moses said" is) to conclude the foregoing. For if I read "aside from your vows … (30:2) And Moses spoke," I would not know to what it ("And Moses spoke") referred, (to what precedes or to what follows?) It is, therefore, written "from your vows … And Moses said," to conclude what precedes. These are the words of R. Yishmael.

(Bamidbar 35:9-10) "And the L-rd spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the children of Israel … When you cross the Jordan, etc.": What is the intent of this section (on the cities of refuge)? From (Devarim 4:41) "Then Moses set aside three cities on the east side of the Jordan," we know only of these. Whence is it derived that Moses commanded Joshua to set aside cities of refuge (on the other side)? From (Bamidbar 35:11) "then you shall designate cities for yourselves." Scripture speaks of (the time) after inheritance and settlement. — But perhaps, upon their entry to the land? It is, therefore, written (Devarim 12:29) "When the L-rd your G-d has cut down the nations, etc." Scripture speaks of (the time after inheritance and settlement). (Bamidbar 35:10) "When you cross the Jordan to the land of Canaan": From here R. Yonathan derived: The Jordan is not part of the land of Canaan. R. Shimon b. Yochai says (Ibid. 26:3) "at the Jordan. Jericho": Just as Jericho is part of Canaan, so is Jordan. (Ibid. 35:11) "Then you shall call out cities (arim) for yourselves." "Calling out" connotes "designation." "cities": I might think, large cities; it is, therefore, written "arim" (connoting small cities). If so, I might think villages. It is, therefore, written "arim." How was this implemented in effect? They were of such size as to have markets and a food store. "And there shall flee there a slayer": I might think, any slayer. It is, therefore, written "a slayer, one who smites a soul unwittingly." If "one who smites a soul," I would think, even one who wounds his father and mother (unwittingly, viz. Shemot 21:15). It is, therefore, written "a slayer, one who smites a soul," Scripture hereby excluding from exile one who (unwittingly) wounds his father and mother.

"and you inherit them and you dwell in their cities and in their houses": Because it is written "and you inherit them and you dwell in their cities," I might think that you are not permitted to add (to the existing settlement); it is, therefore, written (Ibid. 12:29) "and you dwell in their land" — Wherever you wish to build, build.

... “For you have not yet come…” (Devarim 12:9) this was said in order to permit private altars between the ‘resting place’ and the ‘inheritance’, because the resting place refers to Shiloh and the inheritance is Jerusalem. Why did the verse mention them separately? To permit private altars between the two. Inheritance refers to Jerusalem, as its says “My inheritance was to Me like a lion in the forest…” (Yirmiyahu 12:8) and it says “Is My inheritance to Me a speckled bird of prey?” (Yirmiyahu 12:9) These are the words of R’ Yehudah. R’ Shimon says the resting place is Jerusalem and the inheritance is Shiloh, as it says “This is My resting place forever; here I shall dwell for I desired it,” (Tehillim132:14) and it says “For the Lord has chosen Zion; He desired it for His habitation.” (Tehillim 132:13) The opinion that the resting place is Shiloh makes sense, that is why the verse says ‘to the resting place and to the inheritance.’ But according to the opinion that says that the inheritance is Shiloh and the resting place Jerusalem, it should have said ‘to the inheritance and to the resting place’! That is a difficulty. The opinion that both refer to Shiloh makes sense, because ‘the resting place’ where they ceased from the conquest and ‘the inheritance’ is where they divided tribal portions, as it is written “And Yehoshua cast lots at Shiloh before the Lord; and there Yehoshua divided the land…” (Yehoshua 18:10) But according to the opinion that both refer to Jerusalem ‘the inheritance’ is the eternal inheritance, but ‘the resting place’…? What does the resting refer to? The resting of the ark, as it is written “And now, arise, O Lord God to Your resting place, You and the Ark of Your might…” (Divre HaYamim II 6:41) The opinion that both refer to Jerusalem makes sense, because while the Tabernacle was at Shiloh private altars were permitted, as it is written “And Manoah took the kid goat and the meal-offering, and offered it upon the rock to the Lord…” (Shoftim 13:19) But the according to the opinion that both refer to Shiloh, then private altars were forbidden while the Tabernacle was there and how do we understand Manoah’s act? It was a temporary injunction. The House of R’ Yishmael taught like the opinion of R’ Shimon bar Yochai that both refer to Jerusalem, and your sign is: one man pulled many to him…