Midrash su Levitico 22:9
וְשָׁמְר֣וּ אֶת־מִשְׁמַרְתִּ֗י וְלֹֽא־יִשְׂא֤וּ עָלָיו֙ חֵ֔טְא וּמֵ֥תוּ ב֖וֹ כִּ֣י יְחַלְּלֻ֑הוּ אֲנִ֥י יְהוָ֖ה מְקַדְּשָֽׁם׃
Pertanto manterranno la mia carica, affinché non sopportino il peccato per essa e muoiano in essa, se lo profanano: io sono il Signore che li santifico.
Sifra
2) "if he profanes and he sins unwittingly in the sanctified things of the L–rd": I might think that (even) if he derived benefit (from the object), but did not damage it, or if he damaged it but did not derive benefit from it, or it were attached to the ground, or it involved a messenger that did not perform his embassy — (I might think that even then he were liable); it is, therefore, written (here) "and he sins," and it is written "sin" in respect to terumah (Bamidbar 22:9).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sifra
2) Whence is it derived that our verse is speaking of (a Cohein) who has become tamei? "Profanation" is written here, and it is written elsewhere (Vayikra 22:9) (in respect to eating terumah). Just as "profanation" there refers to tumah, so, "profanation" here refers to tumah. And just as "profanation" there is punishable by death) at the hands of Heaven), so, "profanation" here is punishable by death. And just as for "profanation" there, there is (no) placation, so, for "profanation" here there is no placation. R. Yehudah says: It is written here "I am the L–rd," and, below, (Vayikra 22 verse 3) "I am the L–rd." Just as there, the context is kareth ("cutting off"), here, too, it is kareth.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sifra
5) I would exclude (from liability, eating) ma'aser (in a state of tumah), for it is not punishable by death, but I would not exclude (from an offering eating) terumah (in a state of tumah), it being written of that (Vayikra 22:9): "And they (the Cohanim) will die for it if they profane it"; it is, therefore, (to negate this) written "of these” — there are among these that for which he is liable and that for which he is not liable.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy