Midrash su Levitico 14:13
וְשָׁחַ֣ט אֶת־הַכֶּ֗בֶשׂ בִּ֠מְקוֹם אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁחַ֧ט אֶת־הַֽחַטָּ֛את וְאֶת־הָעֹלָ֖ה בִּמְק֣וֹם הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ כִּ֡י כַּ֠חַטָּאת הָאָשָׁ֥ם הוּא֙ לַכֹּהֵ֔ן קֹ֥דֶשׁ קָֽדָשִׁ֖ים הֽוּא׃
E ucciderà l'agnello nel luogo in cui uccidono il sacrificio per il peccato e l'olocausto, nel luogo del santuario; poiché come sacrificio per il peccato è il sacerdote's, così è l'offerta di colpa; è santissimo.
Sifra
1) "For as the sin-offering is the guilt-offering, for the Cohein": Just as the sin-offering comes from chullin (what is mundane [and not from second-tithe]), in the daytime, and (whose blood is sprinkled) with the right hand, so, the guilt-offering. Just as the sin-offering requires a vessel (for the collection of the blood), so, the guilt-offering. Just as (with) the sin-offering, the blood (sprinkled on) the altar permits it (to be eaten by the Cohein), so, (with) the guilt-offering, the altar blood permits it (to be eaten by the Cohanim). If so, let us say: Just as the blood of a sin-offering is applied above (the red line on the altar), so, the blood of this guilt-offering; it is, therefore, written (of guilt-offerings, Vayikra 7:2): "It is holy of holies … and its blood shall he dash on the altar roundabout," to include all of the guilt-offerings, along with the guilt-offering of the leper, as requiring their blood to be applied below (the red line).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sifra
2) Now where is it excluded (from such application, that we need a verse to include it)? — Because it is written (in respect to the guilt-offering of a leper (Vayikra 14:13): "For, as the sin-offering, so is the guilt-offering to the Cohein," (I would think that just as the blood of a sin-offering is applied above (with the Cohein's finger on the corners of the altar), so, the blood of this (guilt-offering); it is, therefore, written, (to negate this,) "the law of the guilt-offering" (including the guilt-offering of the leper). (Vayikra 7:2) ("In the place where they slaughtered the burnt-offering shall they slaughter the guilt-offering; and its blood shall he sprinkle on the altar roundabout.") "and its blood shall he sprinkle": All guilt-offerings, including that of a leper, are herein subsumed, for the application of their blood below (the red line). Whence do we derive that if the blood of a guilt-offering became intermixed with that of peace-offerings (both being applied below the red line) it is (still) to be sprinkled (for whichever he desires)? From "holy of holies … and its blood shall he sprinkle." I might think that the same applied if they became interchanged when alive; it is, therefore, (to negate this,) written "it (is holy of holies," i.e., it must be specially designated by type). What, then, can he do? He lets them graze until they sustain a blemish, after which he sells them and offers a higher priced animal as one type, (guilt-offering or peace-offering, as he chooses), and a higher priced animal as the other type, making up the difference (between higher priced and lower priced) from his pocket, (for either guilt-offering or peace-offering could have been higher priced originally). R. Shimon says: If a guilt-offering became interchanged with a peace-offering, both are to be slaughtered in the north (of the altar, as per the stringency of a guilt-offering); one, as a guilt-offering; the other, as a peace-offering; and each is to be eaten according to the more stringent of them (the guilt-offering, which is eaten for a day and a night). They said to him: But do not peace-offerings require waving (viz. Shemoth 29:26), and guilt-offerings not require waving? He said to them: What of it? Let him wave the guilt-offering! They answered: Offerings, (in this case, peace-offerings,) are not brought to "the house of unfitness" (i.e., By doing this you are opening the door to the invalidation of peace-offerings).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sifra
2) (Vayikra 14:14) ("And the Cohein shall take from the blood of the guilt-offering, and the Cohein shall place it on the tnuch of the right ear of the one to be cleansed, and on the thumb of his right hand, and on the big toe of his right foot.") I would not know which (placing) takes precedence, that of the altar or that of the thumb. From "it is for the Cohein" (Vayikra 14:13), we infer that what validates (the flesh) for the Cohein takes precedence. What do we find to validate (the flesh) for the Cohein? The altar — the altar takes precedence. "it (is for the Cohein"): to exclude one that he slaughtered not for its sake. "holy of holies": to include the log of oil of the leper (as reverting to the Cohein after the applications as the sin-offering and the guilt-offering). "it (is holy of holies"): to exclude (from validity oil) which is lacking the least amount (from the log).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy