Rujukan Talmud untuk Imamat 5:9: Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim, Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat & Sanhedrin

It was stated³⁶Sifry Num. 143, Babli 58b. The argument seems to be that the Pesaḥ, while a personal sacrifice from the offerers, has the status of a public sacrifice, since only public sacrifices can override Sabbath prohibitions and be offered if the people are impure (Mishnah 9:3). Then the verse states that the daily evening offering has to be the second public offering of the day, not the third. (This implies that the additional offerings of Sabbath and holidays are counted as appendices to the daily morning sacrifice.): “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the incense, and the incense the trimming of the lights.³⁷Ex. 27:2.” There are Tannaim who state: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the incense, and the incense the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the trimming of the lights, so that the libations of the daily sacrifice should be accompanying it³⁸“It” here is the burning of the incense on the golden altar in the Temple. Since the daily sacrifices and in the morning may precede, in the evening follow, the daily offering (Babli 59a).” There is nothing preceding the daily morning sacrifice and nothing later than the daily evening sacrifice except Pesaḥ and incense on Passover Eve. “³⁹Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 2(10). From where that nothing should precede the daily morning sacrifice? The verse says, on it ˋolah⁴⁰S. Liebermann conjectures that here one reads עולה as Aramaic אַוְלַא “first”.. And from where that nothing should invalidate the daily evening sacrifice? The verse says, on it šelamim⁴¹Reading שִׁלּוּמִים “finishing”.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, it is not written here he arranges on it ˋolah but he arranges on it the ˋolah, that no elevation offering precede the daily morning sacrifice⁴²Babli 58b. The definite article describes an offering that certainly is brought on the altar immediately after it is readied for service; this must be the daily morning sacrifice.. It was stated: Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa says, people lacking expiation⁴³People forbidden access to sancta unless a reparation sacrifice has been brought in the Temple on their behalf: The woman after childbirth (Lev. 12:6–8), the male sufferer from gonorrhea (Lev.15:14–15), the female sufferer from flux (Lev. 15:29–30), and the person healed from skin disease (Lev. 14:19,31). Babli 59a. bring their expiatory sacrifices after the daily evening sacrifice to enable them to immerse themselves and eat their Pesaḥ in the evening. Rebbi Yudan said, that is, for a rich sufferer from skin disease. But a poor sufferer from skin disease, does he not bring a bird⁴⁴It is clear from Lev. 14:19 that of the two sacrifices offered, an elevation (עולה) and a reparation (חטאת) one, only the latter is expiatory. But in case this is a bird (in all cases except the wealthy sufferer from skin disease), nothing is burned on the altar, only its blood is squeezed out on wall and bottom of the altar (Lev. 5:9). Therefore these offerings by their nature are not subject to the limitations imposed on offerings of which parts are burned on the altar.? Said Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon, does he not bring a reparation sacrifice⁴⁵And Lev. 14:21 declares also the reparation offering as expiatory.?

¹⁷³Here starts another Genizah fragment edited by Ginzberg (pp. 74–75) of which very little is readable for this paragraph. An outsider who officiated in the Temple on the Sabbath¹⁷⁴He commits a deadly sin by officiating (Num. 18:7). In addition, the Temple service on the Sabbath requires many acts, slaughter and burning of sacrifices, which outside the Temple are capital crimes. If the act was unintentional, how many purification sacrifices are due?, or a deformed person who officiated in impurity¹⁷⁵The deformed Cohen is barred from officiating (Lev. 21:16–24). Any impure Cohen is similarly barred (Lev. 22:3). Are the disabilities cumulative or is disqualification one and the same? The question is raised but neither discussed nor answered; it is treated in the parallel in the Babli, Yebamot 32a., the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya said, two; bar Qappara said, one. Bar Qappara objected to the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya: is the outsider liable for any service which is permitted to a Cohen¹⁷⁶Everybody agrees that as an officiating outsider he is liable for a sacrifice. The question is about the Sabbath. Outside the Temple, the Sabbath prohibitions apply to Cohanim and to everybody else. They are lifted in the Temple precinct by biblical decree. Since there is no verse re-instituting the prohibition for laymen in the Temple precinct one should conclude that violating Sabbath prohibitions in the course of Temple service is not sanctionable irrespective of the person who officiates. This is Bar Qappara’s position.? He^176aS. Lieberman has shown that וּמוֹתִיב should be read as הוּא מוֹתִיב. objected and he answered it. Is there not the handful¹⁷⁷We find that prohibitions are to be lifted for Cohanim but not for laymen inside and outside the Temple. A cereal offering is forbidden for all consumption from the moment it was received in a sanctified vessel. The priest has to take a handful from the offering and burn it on the altar; this permits the remainder to be eaten by Cohanim (Lev. 6:7–11) but it remains forbidden for all outsiders.; before the handful was taken it was forbidden for both; after the handful was taken it is forbidden for outsiders and permitted to Cohanim? He said to him, there is a difference, for it is written: no outsider may eat sanctified food¹⁷⁸Lev. 22:10. This is a separate decree independent of Temple or Sabbath.. Is there not the breaking of the neck¹⁷⁹Of sacrifices of birds, Lev. 1:15,5:9. In case of a purification offering, the bird has to be eaten by Cohanim and is prohibited to laymen; the live bird is prohibited to everybody.; before the neck was broken it was forbidden for both; after the neck was broken it is forbidden for outsiders and permitted to Cohanim? He said to him, there is a difference, for it is written: no outsider may eat sanctified food. Is there not the ṭevel¹⁸⁰Produce after the harvest of which heave and tithes were not taken. After these were taken the produce becomes profane but heave is reserved to pure Cohanim. This has no connection with Temple service.; before it was put in order it was forbidden for both; after it was put in order it is forbidden for outsiders and permitted to Cohanim? He said to him, there is a difference, for it is written: no outsider may eat sanctified food. They said, let us go outside and learn. They went outside and heard, Rebbi Yose said, two; Rebbi Simeon said, one. He who said one, because of outsider status. He who said two, one because of outsider status; why the other? Because of slaughter¹⁸¹Of the sacrifices.. But slaughter by an outsider is valid¹⁸²The office of the Cohen starts only with receiving the victim’s blood in a sacred vessel; slaughter of sacrifices, even on the Sabbath, is legitimate for outsiders, mostly Levites. This bolsters Bar Qappara’s case. Babli Yebamot 33b.! But because bringing, sprinkling, and receiving¹⁸³The offices of the Cohen after the receiving of the blood. The blood is sprinkled on the wall of the altar.. These are only because of Sabbath rest¹⁸⁴If there are Sabbath violations they are only of rabbinic prohibitions which as a matter of principle do not apply to the Temple precinct.. Therefore the reason may be only because of the consumption of limbs and fat which were consumed on the altar during the entire night. In the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah¹⁸⁵As explained at the end of the preceding paragraph. This is the reason for the inclusion of this paragraph at this point. who said because of setting fire it is understandable. In the opinion of Rebbi Yose¹⁸⁵As explained at the end of the preceding paragraph. This is the reason for the inclusion of this paragraph at this point. who said because of cooking, what cooking is here? Since he wants their being consumed it is like cooking.

But is this not [derived from] an analogy? It is said "blood" below and it is said "blood" above: just as "blood" that was said below, since it is given as an offering, one [sprinkling] atones—so too "blood" that was said above, since it is given as an offering, one sprinkling atones.