Mesorat%20hashas for Chullin 233:41

תרי

It is the same after the atonement as before the atonement: just as before the atonement it is subject to the law of Sacrilege, so after the atonement it is subject to the law of Sacrilege? - There is nothing that is subject to the law of Sacrilege once its rites have been performed. But is there not? Surely there is the case of the removal of the ashes [from the altar], which [ashes] are subject to the law of Sacrilege even though the rites therewith have been performed, for it is written: And he shall put them beside the altar!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. VI. 3. Every morning the ashes of the burnt-offering upon the altar were scooped up in a firepan and were deposited on the east side of the incline leading to the altar. It was forbidden to derive any use from them.');">¹⁸</span> - This case of the removal of the ashes and that of the garments of the High Priest<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. ibid. XVI. 23. The garments worn by the High Priest on the Day of Atonement when he entered the innermost Sanctuary, the Holy of Holies, had to be put away never to be used again, either by an ordinary priest for his regular services or by a High Priest for service on the Day of Atonement of the following year.');">¹⁹</span> are two texts which teach the same thing, and one may not draw any conclusions from two texts which teach the same thing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These two cases are therefore exceptions to the rule stated above, that after the performance of its rites a thing cannot be subject any more to the law of Sacrilege.');">²⁰</span> This, however, would be right according to the Rabbis who declare that the verse: And he shall leave them there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 645, n. 6.');">²¹</span> teaches that they [sc. th garments] must be hidden away; but according to R'Dosa who declares that the verse teaches that [the High Priest] shall not wear them on a subsequent Day of Atonement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An ordinary priest, however, may wear these garments during the year.');">²²</span> what is to be said? - Rather [say] that the case of the removal of the ashes and that of the heifer whose neck was to be broken<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Deut. XXI, 1ff. The heifer, after the performance of the rites with regard to it, had to be buried in the very place where the ceremony was performed, and it was forbidden to derive any use from it.');">²³</span> are two texts which teach the same thing, and one may not draw any conclusions from two texts which teach the same thing. This is well according to him who maintains that one may not draw conclusions from such texts, but according to him who maintains that one may draw conclusions from such texts, what is to be said? -There are two

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Chullin 233:41. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.