Talmud do Liczb 18:7

A non-Cohen who removed¹¹The formal removal of ashes from the altar.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he is liable. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he is not liable. What is Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish’s reason? Service of bringing¹²Num. 18:7.. This excludes what is a removal. What is Rebbi Joḥanan ’s reason? Anything concerning the altar¹²Num. 18:7.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav: The four kinds of service for which a Cohen would be liable if done outside¹³Outside a divinely approved place of worship; after the building of the Temple, outside of the Temple district. Worship outside the Temple is sinful only if it imitates Temple ceremonies. Babli 24a., the non-Cohen is liable for inside. What are these? Burning incense, and pouring blood, and making libations of water and wine. This follows Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Levi said, even removal of the ashes;¹⁴Babli 24a. this follows Rebbi Joḥanan. If he¹⁵The non-Cohen. stirred the coals, the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. If he¹⁵The non-Cohen. removed the remainder of the ashes, the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, following him who said, others¹⁶Lev. 6:4. Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 2(6)., of lesser value than these. But for him¹⁷According to Sifra, R. Eleazar (the Tanna.) who said others, to include people with bodily defects, there is no difference between a Cohen with a bodily defect and a non-Cohen. Everybody agreed that the non-Cohen who arranged the woods¹⁸The logs of firewood on the altar. is liable. Rebbi Zeˋira said, but only for the two logs on which the verse insists that they are Cohen’s service: Aaron’s the priest’s sons shall put fire on the altar and arrange woods¹⁹Lev. 1:7. Since a simple plural always means 2 (Note 138); this establishes a formal requirement that two new logs be brought to the altar at the start of the morning service; Lev. 6:5. Babli 24b..

What is Rebbi Aqiba’s reason? It says here, dying he shall be put to death⁷⁷E. g. Lev. 20:10. An unspecified death penalty is by strangling;, and it says there, anybody acceding to the Eternal’s abode will die, etc.⁷⁸Num. 17:28. While the verse speaks of the access of non-priests to the Sanctuary, it supports only the rabbis’ argument since it clearly refers to Heaven’s actions. The parallel in the Babli 84a (Sifry Deut. 116, end) makes more sense. What is the rabbis’ reason? It says here, dying he shall be put to death, but it says there, any outsider coming close shall be put to death⁷⁹Num. 18:7. This verse supports R. Aqiba.. It is better to compare shall be put to death with shall be put to death and not shall be put to death with shall die⁸⁰To transfer the interpretation of one word to another verse, the word has to be in the same grammatical form. It is clear that the positions of יומת and ימות have to be switched..