Levítico 16:12 Referências do Talmudee: Jerusalem Talmud Yoma & Jerusalem Talmud Chagigah

Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: If he slaughtered the bull before he drew lots, is he liable⁵⁶In the biblical narrative (Lev. 16), first the he-goat has to be selected by drawing lots (v. 8), then the bull has to be slaughtered (v. 11), then first incense (v. 12) and afterwards the bull’s blood (v. 14) have to be brought into the Sanctuary, then the he-goat has to be slaughtered and its blood brought into the sanctuary (v. 15). If the order was reversed and the he-goat selected close to the time of its slaughter, is the ceremony invalid and therefore the slaughter a violation of the prohibition of work on the day of Atonement, and a deadly sin?? He said to him, let us hear from the following: The bull is obstructive of the he-goat, the he-goat is obstructive of the bull⁵⁷Slaughter of the bull is invalid unless the he-goat was selected; slaughter of the he-goat is invalid unless the bull was slaughtered first (and its blood brought inside, Babli 61a).. This implies that if he slaughtered the bull before he drew lots, he is liable. If you would say that he is not liable, one should state, the he-goat is not obstructive of the bull. Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon said, that is to say, the he-goat does not obstruct the bull in giving between the beams, but for giving on the curtain the he-goat is obstructive of the bull. How is this? He may not give of the bull’s blood on the curtain before he gave of the he-goat’s blood between the beams⁵⁸The blood has to be sprinkled first inside the Holiest of Holies at the place of the Ark in the First Temple, between the beams used to carry the Ark. In the Second Temple, the place was indicated by a stone, but the terminology was not changed. Then it had to be sprinkled in the Sanctuary onto the gobelin separating it from the Holiest of Holies. Babli 40a..

Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is from Rebbi Aqiba’s testimony⁵⁷Mishnah 1 and the first statement of Mishnah 2 apply only to actual Temple sancta and therefore are inoperative after the destruction of the Temple. The later distinctions between sancta and heave also apply to profane food prepared in the purity of sancta.. As we have stated there⁵⁷Mishnah 1 and the first statement of Mishnah 2 apply only to actual Temple sancta and therefore are inoperative after the destruction of the Temple. The later distinctions between sancta and heave also apply to profane food prepared in the purity of sancta., “Rebbi Aqiba added that fine flour, and incense, frankincense, and coals, part of which were touched by a Tevul Yom are all disqualified⁵⁸This statement is implied by the statement of our Mishnah that vessels do combine for sancta. Therefore Mishnah 2 must have been formulated posterior to R. Aqiba..” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, they knew that vessels of Servive do combine. About what comes he to testify? About the leftovers of flour-offerings that they do combine together. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Zamina in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Why did they say, leftovers of flour-offerings do combine together? Because they need their vessel⁵⁹Since the leftovers of flour offerings have to be eaten by priests, they have to be taken from the vessel in which they were presented to the altar. Since the vessel is not needed after presentation and burning of a fistful on the altar, one might think that then the vessel acts like a profane vessel and does not imply disqualification of the entire content composed of disjoint pieces if one piece became disqualified. As long as the vessel is actually used it transmits disqualification. Babli 23b.. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Yasa: they knew that vessels of Service do combine. About what comes he to testify? About fine flour, and incense, and frankincense, and coals⁶⁰These are not foods and not subject to the rules of impurity of foodstuffs up to the fourth degree.. One understands fine flour, and incense, and frankincense. Coals⁶¹They should be impervious to impurity.? Rebbi Abun bar Cahana said, explain it about coals on the Day of Atonement which he has to carry inside in the vessel which he used to scoop up⁶²The coals which the High Priest on the Day of Atonement has to scoop up with a fire-pan and carry into the holiest of holies with the incense (Lev. 16:12). These are the only coals which become disqualified if outside a dedicated Vessel of Service.. But [not]⁶³Corrector’s addition, making explicit the text’s meaning. about every day’s coals. As we have stated there⁶⁴Mishnah Tamid 5:5., “If a qab of coals were dispersed, one sweeps them into the water canal, but on the Sabbath one covers it with a wine-cooler⁶⁵Greek ψυκτήρ, a big metal vessel.. Rebbi Mattania said, do fine flour, and incense, frankincense, and coals, need a minimum volume in this respect? Not because they have to be in their vessel? Here also because they have to be in their vessel⁶⁶He holds that the Mishnah in Idiut applies to all coals removed from the altar. The rule is that the burned-out charcoal remainders have to be removed in dedicated fire-pans. Even if the later are spilled and swiped into the water canal crossing the inner courtyard, they were removed in a dedicated vessel, and in this case the vessel combines all its contents. The same holds for a large private flour offering, not subject to the amounts prescribed for public offerings, and which might be presented in two or more vessels. In that case, each vessel separately transmits disqualification from a part of its contents to all of it..

If he slaughtered and died⁷⁹Lev. 16:3 requires that Aaron come to the sanctuary with a bull. R. Simeon ben Laqish reads the verse as implying that any other Cohen cannot use his bull’s blood. All other authorities read the same verse as permitting the blood to another Cohen, as explained at the end of the paragraph.. May the other⁸⁰This is the late Amora usually called R. Ḥinena. Babli 49a. enter with his blood. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, with a bull, but not with its blood⁸¹Presuming that somehow the incense did not become impure by the impurity of the dead, may the replacing Cohen use the first’s fistful even though his own fist probably is of different size?. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Jonathan both are saying, even with the blood. The word of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi implies even with the blood. For Rebbi Ḥanina⁸²Lev. 16:12. For the blood it is not written “the blood which he collected”; therefore the blood is transferable., Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan , even with the blood. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi asked, if he took a fistful and then died, may one enter with his fistful⁸³Discussion of Mishnah 5.? Why does he question his fistful? For it is written, his fistful⁸Lev. 16:8., but here it is not written “his blood”⁴Standing between the two he-goats, the lot in his right hand is put on the he-goat to his right, and the one in his left on the he-goat to his left side.. It is obvious for him, even with the blood.