Torah Community Connections

Week 143 - Wednesday - 21 August 2002

ZEVAHIM: CHAPTER 7: MISHNAH 2

If he offered the burnt-offering of a bird above, in the manner of a burnt-offering, under the name of a burnt-offering - it is valid; in the manner of a burnt-offering under the name of a sin-offering - it is valid but the owners did not thereby fulfill their obligation; in the manner of a sin-offering under the name of a burnt-offering, in the manner of a sin-offering under the name of a sin-offering - it is invalid. If he offered below in the manner of any of them - it is invalid.

Kehati

The preceding chapter outlined the difference between the burnt-offering and the sin-offering of a bird in that the latter is performed below, i.e., the priest stands on the door of the Temple Court, by the south-western corner of the altar; where he performs the melikah; sprinkles the blood onto the side of the altar below the hut hasikra and subsequently drains the blood. However, the burnt-offering of a bird is prepared above, i.e., the priest ascends the ramp to the south-eastern corner where he performs the melikah and drains the blood against the side of the altar (above the hut hasikra). There is also a difference in the melihah; whereas with the sin-offering the priest cuts only one, or most of one, of the two organs (gullet or windpipe) without severing the head, with a burnt-offering he cuts both organs and severs the bird's head. Whereas the preceding mishnah dealt with the sin-offering of a bird prepared not under its own name, or in a deviant manner, our mishnah deals with the burnt-offering of a bird offered in such circumstances.

If he offered the burnt-offering of a bird above - the hut hasikra in the prescribed manner of a burnt-offering, - as explained above, having performed the melikah, severed the head and drained the blood above the hut hasikra under the name of a burnt-offering - it is valid - since he abided by the regulations. This is a mere preamble to the rules following in this mishnah. According to Bartenura, however, our mishnah explains that even if the priest deviated from the rules and did not sever the head, it is nevertheless valid. Accordingly the present First Tanna rejects the ruling (see 6:6) that failure to sever in the case of a burnt-offering disqualifies it (see Tosefot Yom Tov); so, too, if he offered the burnt-offering of a bird

in the manner of a burnt-offering - as explained above - under the name of a sin-offering - i.e., not under its own name - it is valid - fit for the altar, but just as in the case of an animal burnt-offering slaughtered under a different name (see 1:1; 1:3) the owners did not thereby fulfill their obligation - i.e., they must replace it. But if the burnt-offering of a bird was offered

in the manner of a sin-offering - e.g., performing the melikah without severing the head; according to Bartenura (see first section of the mishnah), if he sprinkled its blood but did not drain it, even if this proceeded under the name of a burnt-offering, and likewise if the burnt-offering of a bird offered in the manner of a sin-offering as well as under the name of a sin-offering - and not under the name of a burnt-offering - it is invalid - on account of the deviation. If he offered below the hut hasikra in the manner of any of them - of the instances stated in our mishnah, even in accordance with the rules and under the name of a burnt-offering - it is invalid since the service was performed below the hut hasikra.

ZEVAHIM: CHAPTER 7: MISHNAH 3

And none of them render unclean in the gullet, and they are susceptible to me’ilah, except the sin-offering of a bird that was offered below in the manner of a sin-offering under the name of a sin-offering.

Kehati

For an effective comprehension of this mishnah, let us note the differing rules of uncleanness regarding the carcass of kasher birds and animals. Whereas a dead animal or a kasher animal improperly slaughtered, renders unclean by contact or by carrying, a dead kasher bird or one improperly slaughtered does not render unclean by contact or by carrying but only in the gullet. Thus, swallowing an olive's bulk of a dead kasher bird causes first degree uncleanness to the garments and vessels (but not to a person or an earthen vessel) which one touches while it is in his gullet. Referring to the two preceding mishnahs' elaboration of sacrifices rendered invalid, our mishnah teaches that the melikah nevertheless exempts their carcasses from uncleanness.

And none of them - of all the bird sin- and burnt-offerings (dealt with in mishnahs 1 and 2) rendered invalid due to the priest's deviant procedure, or a bird sin-offering prepared under a different name - none of these render unclean in the gullet, - though invalid and unfit for consumption they do not render unclean in the gullet (as explained above), since the melikah exempts them from the status of a carcass –

and they are susceptible to me’ilah, if one benefits one perutah's worth from the above, he must bring a me’ilah guilt-offering, as does anyone who mistreats Temple property, except the sin-offering of a bird that was offered below the hut hasikra in the manner of a sin-offering under the name of a sin-offering - since it was offered correctly and became fit for priests' consumption, a non-priest who benefits from it (after the blood sprinkling) does not commit me’ilah; however, one who benefits from a disqualified bird sin-offering, which was at no time fit for the priests, commits me’ilah. It is different if one benefits from the burnt-offering of a bird which is susceptible to me’ilah, even when offered correctly, since all of it is burnt on the altar.

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives