Midrash sobre Levítico 1:16

(Numb. 30:2–3 [1–2]:) THEN MOSES SPOKE UNTO THE HEADS OF THE TRIBES …: WHEN SOMEONE MAKES A VOW (neder) TO THE LORD, <….> Let our master instruct us: What about konamot (i.e., vows of abstinence) and vows (nedarim)?¹Tanh., Numb. 9:1. Thus have our masters taught (in Ned. 2:1): <IF ONE MAKES> A KONAM (i.e., a vow of absitinence) [THAT HE WILL NOT SLEEP, THAT HE WILL NOT SPEAK, THAT HE WILL NOT WALK; IF HE UTTERS A KONAM TO HIS WIFE THAT HE WILL NOT HAVE MARITAL RELATIONS WITH HER, SUCH A ONE IS LIABLE TO <THE INJUNCTION> (in Numb. 30:3 [2]): HE SHALL NOT BREAK HIS WORD. <IF HE SWEARS> AN OATH (shevu'ah)] THAT HE WILL NOT SLEEP, THAT HE WILL NOT SPEAK, THAT HE WILL NOT WALK, HE IS FORBIDDEN <TO DO SO>.²Cf. Ned. 2:2-5; Ned. 13b, 14b-15a; 20a; yNed. 2:2-5 (37b-6); above, Lev. 1:16; cf. Matthew 5:33-37; 23:16-22; James 5:12. Oaths (shevu'ot) carry more weight than vows (nedarim); and vows, than oaths. How so? <If one makes> a konam not to make a Sukkah, not to take up a Lulab, not to put on phylacteries, in the case of vows (nedarim) it is forbidden to put them on or to make them, even though they are commanded (in Torah); but in the case of oaths (shevu'ot) it is permitted, because one does not swear to transgress against the commandments. The Holy One said to the Israelites: Be circumspect with your vows (nedarim) and do not break them, for all who break vows (nedarim) end up in being faithless in oaths (shevu'ot). Moreover, the one who is faithless in oaths is denying me and will never have forgiveness, as stated (in Exod. 20:7 = Deut. 5:11): <YOU SHALL NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD YOUR GOD IN VAIN,> FOR THE LORD WILL NOT EXONERATE <ONE WHO TAKES HIS NAME IN VAIN>. It is also written (in Jer. 4:2): AND YOU SHALL SWEAR: AS THE LORD LIVES, <IN TRUTH, IN JUSTICE, AND IN RIGHTOUSNESS>. The Holy One said to the Israelites: Do not think that you have permission to swear in my name even in truth.³Numb. R. 22:1. You are not entitled to swear by my name unless you possess all the following attributes (of Deut. 10:20): THE LORD YOUR GOD YOU SHALL FEAR, [HIM YOU SHALL SERVE, TO HIM YOU SHALL HOLD FAST, AND BY HIM YOU SHALL SWEAR]:

(Numb. 30:3:) “When someone makes a vow (neder) to the Lord.” Let our master instruct us: How are konamot (i.e., vows of abstinence) and vows (nedarim)? Thus have our masters taught (in Ned. 2:1): [If one makes] a konam (i.e., a vow of absitinence) [that he will not sleep, that he will not speak; [if he utters a konam to his wife] “that I will not have marital relations with you,” such a one is liable to [the injunction] (in Numb. 30:3), “he shall not break his word.” [If he swears] an oath (shevu'ah)] that he will not sleep, that he will not walk, he is forbidden [to do so].¹Cf. Ned. 2:2-5; Ned. 13b, 14b-15a; 20a; yNed. 2:2-5 (37b-6); above, Lev. 1:16. Oaths (shevu'ot) carry more weight than vows (nedarim); and vows, than oaths. How so? [if one makes] a konam not to make a sukkah, not to take up a lulab, not to put on phylacteries, in the case of vows (nedarim) it is forbidden to put them on or to make them, even though they are commandments (of the Torah); but in the case of oaths (shevu'ot) it is permitted, because one does not swear to transgress against the commandments. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, “Be circumspect with your vows (nedarim) and do not break them; for all who break vows (nedarim) end up in being faithless in oaths (shevu'ot).” And the one who is faithless in oaths is denying the Holy One, blessed be He through it and will never have forgiveness, as stated (in Exod. 20:7 = Deut. 5:11), “for the Lord will not exonerate [one who takes His name in vain].” [Yet] it is also written (in Jer. 4:2), “And you shall swear, ‘As the Lord lives,’ [in truth, in justice, and in righteousness].” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, “Do not think that you have permission to swear in My name even in truth.²Numb. R. 22:1. You are not entitled to swear by My name unless you possess all the following attributes (of Deut. 10:20), “The Lord your God you shall fear, Him you shall serve, to Him you shall hold fast, [and by Him you shall swear]”: That you should be like those three who were called God-fearing, Abraham, Job, and Joseph: Abraham of whom it is written (in Gen. 22:12), “For now I know that you fear [God].” Concerning Job it is written (in Job 1:1), “the man was blameless [and upright, one who feared God].” Concerning Joseph it is written (in Gen. 42:18), “for I fear God.” Ergo (in Deut. 10:20), “The Lord your God you shall fear.” (Deut. 10:20, cont.:) “Him you shall serve.” [You do so,] if you turn [all] your attention to the Torah, fulfill [its] commandments and have no other work (abodah). It therefore is stated (ibid.), “Him you shall serve (rt.: 'bd).” (Deut. 10:20, cont.:) “To Him you shall hold fast.” Can one hold fast to the Divine Presence? Moreover, has it not already been stated (in Deut. 4:24), “For the Lord your God is a consuming fire?” It is simply [being stated with reference to] anyone marrying off his daughter to a scholar who reads [Scripture] and recites [Mishnah], that he engage in commerce³Gk.: pragmateia. for him and have him benefit from his assets.⁴Ket. 111b; cf. Sot. 14a. It is with reference to [such a] one that it is stated (in Deut. 10:20), “to him you shall hold fast.”
If you have all these [attributes] you may swear; if not, you are not entitled to swear. There is a story about King [Jannai], that he had two thousand towns and they all were destroyed because of a true oath. (Numbers 30:17:) “Between a man and his wife, between a father and his daughter.” Just like a man only annuls vows of self-affliction and matters between him and her, so too a father only annuls with regards to self-affliction and what is between him and her.

1) (Vayikra 1:16): "And he shall cast it" (the crop, etc.): "it" — that of a kasher offering, and not that of a pasul offering; "it" — not (that of) a bird sin-offering, (whose crop the Cohein may eat if he so wishes). "it" is cast (in the place of the ashes), and not the (corresponding parts of the) burnt-offering of a beast, (which are rinsed and sacrificed).

2) For (in the absence of "it"), I would reason: Is it not a kal vachomer (that these parts in a beast should be pasul), viz.: If in an instance (that of a bird) where the skin is permitted (for the altar), the crop is pasul, in the instance (that of a beast), where the skin is pasul, how much more so should the crop be pasul! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "it" — it (that of a bird burnt-offering) is to be cast, and not that of a beast.

3) (Vayikra 1:16): "etzel the altar" — near the altar; "kedmah" — to the east of the ramp; "in the place of the ashes" — where the ashes were deposited. R. Chaninah says: There were two ash depositories, one in the east of the ramp and one in the east of the altar. In the first were placed the crops of birds and the ashes of the inner altar and of the menorah; and in the second were burned the p'sulin of higher-order offerings and (those of) the devoted portions of lower-order offerings.

3) (Vayikra 1:16): "baked in an oven": and not baked in a brazier, or on hot tiles, or in the improvised fire places of the Arabs. R. Yehudah says: Why "oven," "oven," twice? (here and Vayikra 7:9). To validate a brazier. R. Shimon says: Why "oven," "oven," twice? (One,) that he consecrate it (to be baked in) an oven, and (the other,) that all of its processing be in an oven.

4) (Vayikra 1:16): "And he shall rend it" — one that is kasher and not one that is pasul (i.e., If he performed melikah outside the prescribed time, he does not remove it from the altar, but sacrifices it without rending.) "it" required rending, but not a beast burnt-offering. For (in the absence of "it") I would reason: Is it not a kal vachomer, viz.: If a bird burnt-offering, which does not require flaying, requires rending — a beast burnt-offering, which does require flaying, how much more so must it require rending! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "And he shall rend it" — it requires rending, but not a beast burnt-offering.

4) (Vayikra 1:16); "soleth": Just as "soleth" mentioned elsewhere is of wheat, so, here, it is of wheat. "unleavened cakes (challoth) mixed (with oil"); but the wafers are not to be mixed. For (if not for the exclusion clause) we would reason: If challoth, which do not require spreading (with oil after they are baked), require mixing (with oil before they are baked) — wafers, which require spreading (with oil after they are baked), how much more so should they require mixing (with oil before they are baked)! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "challoth mixed," and not wafers mixed.

5) ("And he shall rend it) with its feathers" — This permits the skin (to which the feathers are attached). For (in the absence of "with its feathers") I would reason: If in an instance (that of a beast burnt-offering) where the crop, (which is foul), is permitted (to be sacrificed) — the skin, (which gives off a foul odor upon burning), is forbidden, here, where the crop is forbidden, how much more so should the skin be forbidden! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "with its feathers" — the skin is permitted.

5) (Vayikra 1:16): "wafers spread (with oil" after baking), and not challoth spread. Now does it not follow (that challoth should require spreading), viz.: If wafers, which do not require mixing (with oil before baking) require spreading (with oil after baking) — challoth, which require mixing, how much more so should they require spreading! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "wafers spread," and not challoth spread.

6) ("And he shall rend it) but he shall not divide it." I might think that if he did divide it, it is pasul; it is, therefore, written: "and (including an instance in which it was divided), he shall smoke." If "and he shall smoke," I might think (it is sacrificed) even if he performed melikah with a knife (instead of with his fingernail); it is, therefore, written: ("and he shall smoke) it." Why do you see fit to make it kasher in the instance of dividing and to make it pasul in that of melikah? After Scripture includes, it excludes. Why do I make dividing kasher? Because it follows conciliation (by the blood). I make melikah (with a knife) pasul because it precedes conciliation.

7) ("It is) a burnt-offering" — even if he wrung out the blood of the body and not that of the head. — But perhaps (the intent is) even if he wrung out the blood of the head and not that of the body! It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "It is a burnt-offering" (connoting the greater part of it). "a burnt-offering, a fire-offering, a savor, sweet, to the L–rd": "a burnt-offering" — to that end (i.e., he must have that intent); "a fire-offering" — to that end (i.e., to exclude charring it instead of burning its ashes); "a savor" — to that end (to exclude roasting it beforehand); "sweet" (nichoach) — to give pleasure (nachath ruach); "to the L–rd" — to the Creator of the world.

9) (Vayikra 1:16): "And he shall remove murato with its entrails"): This ("murato") is the crop. I might think he pierces through (the skin) with a knife and removes it; it is, therefore, written: "with its entrails." He removes it together with the entrails. Abba Yossi b. Chanan says: He removes the maw with it.