레위기 4:26 탈무드 참조: Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim & Sanhedrin

The rabbis of Caesarea asked: I could think that the one who receives or carries [the blood]¹⁴⁵The Cohen who receives the blood of the sacrifice slaughtered by a layman or Levite, and the one who carries it to the altar. These two actions are biblically required. Reception of the blood in a sanctified vessel is mentioned explicitly; the action of carrying the blood is required implicitly since slaughter of the sacrifice must be performed away from the altar (North of the altar for most holy sacrifices, Lev. 1:11; before the Tent of Meeting for simple sacrifices, Lev. 3:2,8,13). on leavened matter be liable. The verse says, sacrifice. Since slaughtering for sacrifice is particular in that one is liable for it outside [the Sanctuary], this excludes the one who receives or carries on leavened matter for which one is not liable outside¹⁴⁶In the prohibition of sacrifices outside the Sanctuary (Lev. 17), only slaughter (v.4), pouring and burning of the parts (v. 6) are mentioned. There exists liability for extirpation or a purification sacrifice even if the slaughter was performed so that collection of the blood and carrying it was not necessary.. I could think that one who burns parts on leavened matter be liable. The verse says, and he atones¹⁴⁷This expression is never used for the Pesaḥ. The reference is to the verses referring to purification sacrifices, Lev.4:26,31, from which it would appear that the burning of the fat on the altar is the atoning agent but which in Sifra Wayyiqra II (Ḥovah) Pereq 11 (5–6) is explained to refer only to the pouring of the blood.. Since pouring is particular in that it is indispensable for atonement, this excludes burning of the parts, which is not indispensable for atonement. Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi asked before Rebbi Yose. Instead of arguing for absence of liability, argue for liability. I could think that the one who receives or carries [the blood]¹⁴⁸The argument shows that instead of “the one who receives or carries” one has to read “one who burns parts”. on leavened matter not be liable. The verse says, sacrifice. Since slaughtering for sacrifice is particular in that for it one is liable outside [the Sanctuary], I also am adding burning of the parts for which one is liable outside. I could think that one who burns parts on leavened matter¹⁴⁹The argument shows that instead of “one who burns parts” one has to read “the one who receives or carries”. not be liable. The verse says, and he atones. Since pouring is particular in that it is indispensable for atonement, I also am adding the one who receives or carries who is indispensable for atonement¹⁵⁰The argument of the rabbis of Caesarea is invalid since it can be turned upside down.. He said to him, anything equal in both respects instructs; anything not equal in both respects does not instruct. Sacrifice. Since slaughtering for sacrifice is particular in that it is indispensable for atonement and for it one is liable outside [the Sanctuary], this excludes the one who receives or carries on leavened matter for which one is not liable outside; it excludes burning of the parts, which is not indispensable for atonement¹⁵¹The statement of the rabbis of Caesarea is correct but their argument is incomplete..

Beit Hillel, as it is taught [in a baraita]: "And he atones" (Leviticus 4:20), "And he atones" (Leviticus 4:26), "And he atones" (Leviticus 4:31)—because of the analogy [you might have drawn proving that four sprinkles are required].