Commentary for Meilah 21:34

אמאי לא

The School of R'Ishmael taught: [It reads there] to make atonement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVII, 11.');">²⁰</span> [meaning], I have given it for atonement, but not [to make it subject] to the Law of Sacrilege. R'Johanan says: Scripture Says. For it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');">²²</span> [The blood] before [the act of]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the sprinkling of the blood.');">²³</span> atonement is to be compared to its status after the act of atonement.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'It is' is understood to convey as much as 'it remains in the same status', Rashi Yoma ibid.');">²⁴</span> Just as after the act of atonement it is exempted from the Law of Sacrilege, so before the act of atonement it is exempted from the Law of Sacrilege. But why not infer [in the other direction]: Just as before the act of atonement the Law of Sacrilege applies to it, so also after the act of atonement the Law of Sacrilege applies to it? - Is there at all a thing to which the Law of Sacrilege applies after the Prescribed ceremony had been performed therewith! - But why not?

Explore commentary for Meilah 21:34. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.