פירוש על דברים 18:3

מאת העם [AND THIS SHALL BE THE PRIESTS’ DUE] FROM THE PEOPLE — but not from the priest (i.e. if a priest slaughters animals for his own use he is exempt from giving these dues to another priest) (Sifrei Devarim 165:3; cf. Chullin 132b).

AND THIS SHALL BE THE PRIESTS’ DUE FROM THE PEOPLE. This is a new commandment not mentioned in [the preceding books of] the Torah, for, in the wilderness where they did not slaughter oxen or sheep except as peace-offerings, He did not mention it because it does not apply to consecrated animals. Now, as they were about to enter the Land, he declared it to them for the first time. This is the sense of the expression [And this shall be the priests’ due from the people] from them that slaughter the animal. That is to say, when they will slaughter an animal as I have permitted you, [as it is said], then thou mayest slaughter of thy herd and of thy flock as I have commanded thee, and thou mayest eat in thy gates¹³⁸Above, 12:21. [you shall give the priest his due the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw]. He did not allocate this [gift of the shoulder, cheeks, and maw] to Aaron in the section, And the Eternal said unto Aaron¹³⁹Numbers 18:9. [wherein the other priestly gifts are enumerated], although there He assigned the heave-offerings and the first-fruits [despite the fact that they, like the gifts in the verse before us] apply only in the Land. The reason [for mentioning them there] is that there He stated all things that He gave the priests in sacred matters, for even things “devoted” are holy.¹⁴⁰Ibid., Verse 14. See Leviticus 27:28. But the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw, and the first of the fleece¹⁴¹Verse 4. [mentioned here] are completely unconsecrated, since there are no special laws regarding them aside from the commandment of giving them to the priest. Similarly He did not mention there [in the chapter of the priestly gifts] the law of property wrongfully taken from a proselyte [which reverts to the priests¹⁴²Numbers 5:8. if the proselyte died without leaving an heir, and the reason this law is not mentioned in the chapter of the priestly gifts is, as explained concerning the gift in the verse before us, that the reverted property of the proselyte is not sacred].
But according to the interpretation of our Rabbis, all [of the twenty-four priestly gifts] are alluded to there [in the section, And the Eternal said unto Aaron].¹³⁹Numbers 18:9. Thus they have said:¹⁴³Sifre, Korach 117. “The first part of them¹⁴⁴Numbers 18:12. — this refers to the first of the fleece. Which they give¹⁴⁴Numbers 18:12. — this refers to the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw.¹⁴⁵This interpretation is evidently based on the fact [as explained above] that in this particular priestly gift the commandment consists solely in “giving” it, but otherwise no sanctity attaches thereto. Unto the Eternal¹⁴⁴Numbers 18:12. — this refers to the dough-offering.”¹⁴⁶Of the dough-offering it is said, ye shall set apart a portion for a gift ‘unto the Eternal’ (ibid., 15:19). If so, this also is an explanatory commandment [and not a new one].
Based on a Midrash [a homiletic explanation] the Sages have said¹⁴⁷Chullin 134b. [that the shoulder, cheeks, and maw were awarded to the priests in the merit of the deed of Phinehas]: “The shoulder because he took a spear in his hand;¹⁴⁸Numbers 25:7. the two cheeks because of his prayer, as it is said, Then stood up Phinehas and prayed etc.;¹⁴⁹Psalms 106:30. the maw because of what it states, and he thrust both of them through etc. and the woman through her body.”¹⁵⁰Numbers 25:8. Now, [if we are to say that this priestly gift had already been suggested in the section containing G-d’s words to Aaron, which occurred long before the story of Phinehas, we must say] on the basis of this Midrash that the merit that was destined [to be Phinehas’] was alluded to [in that section], and [G-d] rewarded the entire tribe for the merit of Phinehas’ when he [Phinehas] earned the privilege of being a priest with them.
And the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] said in the Moreh Nebuchim¹⁵¹The Guide of the Perplexed III, 39. that the cheeks [are given to the priests] because they are the first part of the body [of the animal], the shoulder is the first of the extremities of the body, and the maw is the first of the inwards, for the first of them all is given to the ministers of the Most High in His honor.

וזה יהיה משפט הכהנים, “and this shall be the allotted share of the priests;” Nachmanides writes that this is a commandment which does not again appear in the Torah. In Parshat Korach (Numbers 18,8-20) where the allotments to the priests are enumerated; what follows now has not been mentioned, as in the desert every animal that had been slaughtered had first been consecrated as an offering. Only after בשר תאוה, meat of a secular character, will be permissible, after settlement in the land of Israel, will gifts from such animals be mandatory even though the animal from which they were taken had never been consecrated. This is the reason that the Torah describes the owners of such non-consecrated animals as זובחי הזבח, “the ones who perform a slaughter.” In other words, whenever Israelites have occasion to slaughter one of their animals, the parts described in this chapter are to be given to one of the priests. In chapter 18 of Numbers the gifts to the priests revolve around the concept of חרם, matters segregated from the community at large on pain of various penalties. This is also why the topic of גזל הגר, restitution of property stolen from a convert who died before he could have left behind natural heirs, is not included in Numbers chapter 18. There is an aggadah in Chulin 134 in which the origin of these gifts is traced to the valiant deed of Pinchas, son of the High Priest Eleazar, and symbolic meaning is attached to each of these animal parts listed here. According to Maimonides the jaw given to the priests symbolizes a portion of the head of the animal’s body, whereas the front leg symbolizes the first limb that is partially detached from the rump. Gifts to the priests always symbolize the “first” or “best” of something.