Kapłańska 6:19 Odniesienia do Talmudu: Jerusalem Talmud Nedarim, Jerusalem Talmud Challah, Jerusalem Talmud Yoma & Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim

“Like vows of the good ones, he did not say anything.” Does this mean that good people make vows⁸³The formulation seems to imply that free-will offerings of the wicked do exist; otherwise how could one speak about them?? Since that one made a vow, he is not a good one. ⁹²Purification offerings cannot be voluntary; they are required either for an inadvertent sin or for purification from a state of impurity. A male who does not sin inadvertently and who does not suffer from an impure sickness has no way to fulfill the commandments relative to the purification offerings. A woman can always bring a purification offering after childbirth. The Mishnah follows Rebbi Jehudah since it was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah, the ancient pious ones desired to bring a purification offering⁹³From here to the end of the paragraph, the text is also in Nazir 1:6, 51c 1. 36., but the Omnipresent did not let a sin happen to them; so they made a vow of nazir in order to be able to bring a purification offering⁹⁴One of the 3 prescribed animal sacrifices at the end of the nazir period; Num. 6:14.. Rebbi Simeon says, they became sinners because they made a vow of nazir, for it was said: “He shall atone for him for what he sinned about the person⁹⁵Num. 6:11. In Sifry Num. 30, R. Ismael points out that this verse is written about the nazir who became inadvertently impure in the impurity of the dead, who is in effect a sinner in respect to the dead person. The Babli, 10a, accepts the argument of R. Simeon, which in the Tosephta, 1:1, is in the name of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.,” that one sinned against his own person because he barred himself from [drinking] wine. It turns out that that of Simeon the Just parallels Rebbi Simeon. As it was stated⁹⁶Babli 9b, Nazir Yerushalmi 1:6, Babli 4b, Sifry Num. 22, Num. rabba10(20).: Simeon the Just said, I never ate the reparation offering of a nazir except once. Once a man came to me from the South, I saw that he was reddish, with beautiful eyes and good looks, and his hair in nice rows of waves⁹⁷A combination of images referring to David (1S. 17:42) and the friend in the Song of Songs (5:11).. I said to him, my son, what induced you to cut off that beautiful hair? He said to me: Great man, I was a shephard in my village and I went to fill the water vessel with water when I saw my mirror image in the water and my instinct rushed over me and tried to lose me from the World⁹⁸He realized how much money he could make as a male prostitute in a hellenized city but that he would lose the World to Come.. I said to it, wicked! You are rushing me to something which is not yours; it is upon me to sanctify you to Heaven! I bent my head to him and said, my son, there should be many more in Israel who fulfill the Omnipresent’s will like you. About you the verse says¹⁴Num. 6:2., “man or woman, if he clearly articulates vowing a vow of nazir, to be a nazir for the Eternal.” Rebbi Mana asked⁹⁹Babli 9b.: Why following Simeon the Just, even following Rebbi Simeon? Did Simeon the Just never eat a purification offering for suet¹⁰⁰The standard purification offering is for the purification from an inadvertent sin which at least carries a penalty of extirpation by Divine decree, e. g., if somebody ate suet or blood inadvertently. In order to effect the purification, the Cohanim have to eat the sacrificial meat (Lev. 6:19). How can somebody called “the Just” refuse to purify people?? Did Simeon the Just never eat a purification offering for blood? Simeon the Just holds that people make a vow while they are upset. Since they make the vow while they are upset, in the end, they wonder¹⁰¹They feel that they should not have made the vow. This becomes acute in particular in the case of the reparation offering, which is brought only in case of impurity of the nazir, who has to restart his entire time as nazir after his impurity has been repaired. Since the verse repeatedly requires that offerings in the Temple must be brought willingly (Lev. 1:3, 22:29), an offering brought unwillingly is of questionable validity.. But if he wonders, his sacrifices become similar to one of those who slaughtered profane animals in the Temple courtyard. But this one made a well thought-out dedication, when his mouth and his thoughts were in unison¹⁰²Which alone makes the vow unquestionably valid..

¹⁴⁶Tosephta Ḥallah 2:7–9, Babli Baba Qama 110b, Ḥulin 132b, Sifry Qoraḥ #119 (“12 in the Temple, 12 in the countryside”), Midrash Tanḥuma Bemidbar 24, Num. rabba 5(1).24 gifts were given to Aaron and his sons, ten in the Temple, four in Jerusalem, and ten in the countryside. These are the ten in the Temple: Purification offering¹⁴⁷Lev. 6:19., reparation offering¹⁴⁸Lev. 7:7., public well-being offerings¹⁴⁹Lev. 23:19. Even though this sacrifice is labelled “well-being offering”, being a public offering it is treated as most holy and must be eaten by Cohanim in the Temple precinct., purification offering of a bird¹⁵⁰While there is no separate verse commanding that the purification offering of a bird must be eaten, since the burnt offering of a bird is consumed on the altar it follows that the purification offering must be eaten., the reparation offering for suspected guilt¹⁵¹Lev5:17–18., the log of oil of the skin-diseased¹⁵²Lev 14:10,21. The unused part of the oil becomes property of the Cohen., the two breads¹⁵³Lev. 23:17., the shew-bread¹⁵⁴Lev. 24:9., the remainders of cereal offerings¹⁵⁵Lev. 2:3, 6:9–11., and the ‘omer¹⁵⁶Lev. 23:10–11.. These are in Jerusalem: Firstlings¹⁵⁷While these are sacrifices, after the blood was sprinkled on the altar wall the animal was eaten by the Cohen and his family anywhere in the city., First Fruits¹⁵⁸Cf. Mishnah Bikkurim 3:10., what was lifted from thanksgiving sacrifices and from the nazir’s ram¹⁵⁹In fact, any part lifted for the Cohen from any well-being sacrifice is for the Cohen and his entire family, to be eaten outside the Temple precinct. Cf. Lev. 7:34, Num. 18:11., and the skins of sacrifices¹⁶⁰Only of most holy sacrifices (burnt, purification, and reparation offerings); Lev. 7:8.. These are in the countryside: Heave, Heave of the Tithe, ḥallah, foreleg, jawbone, and first stomach¹²⁷Deut. 18:3., the first shearing¹⁶¹Deut. 18:4., robbery of the proselyte¹⁶²Num. 5:8. It is assumed that the only person without legal heirs is the proselyte who had no children after his conversion., redemption of the firstborn¹⁶³Ex. 13., redemption of the firstborn donkey¹⁶³Ex. 13., ḥērem-dedications, and fields of inheritance¹⁶⁴Dedicated and not redeemed; Lev. 27:16–21..

Rebbi Shammai said, a baraita implies that the remainders are obstructive, as we have stated: ²⁰⁰Babli Zevaḥim 52b, Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 3(4).“The lower ones, if given on the upper did not placate since nothing of them is brought on the upper, should you not say about the upper ones, if given on the lower they placate since something of them is brought below²⁰¹Blood of elevation and well-being sacrifices which has to be given on the walls of the altar below the walkway at half-height certainly cannot validly be given on the upper part of the walls, but blood of purification sacrifices which must be given on the horns of the altar (by a Cohen standing on the walkway) should be valid if given on the lower walls since at the end the remainder of the blood is poured on the base which is below the lower walls.? The inner ones²⁰²Blood used inside the Sanctuary, of the day of Atonement, and of the bulls of the Anointed and the community. shall prove, since some of them is given outside, but if he gave them outside²⁰³If none of the blood was brought inside, the ceremony certainly is invalid. it did not placate, since the altar did not cleanse them²⁰⁴Since the altar is the place of only the third and fourths stops in the use of the blood inside the Sanctuary., what should you say about the upper ones, if given on the lower they should placate since the horns cleanse them²⁰⁵After blood of purification sacrifices was given on the horns, what is left becomes remainder.. Since the horns cleanse them, if he gave them below it should be qualified. The verse says it²⁰⁶Lev. 6:19. The purification sacrifice except for the parts destined for the altar is eaten by the Cohanim, but only if the priest purified it, i. e., followed all the prescribed rules., that he give the blood on the upper, but not that he give in the lower.” What does it mean, “the altar did not cleanse them”? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it does not cleanse them to turn them into remainders; only through the beams and the gobelins²⁰⁷Blood on the altar is invalid if from it was not previously given between the beams and on the gobelins. they become remainders.