Shevuot 13

עולה ויורד ניתי מידי דהוה אשמיעת קול ואביטוי שפתים

a sliding scale sacrifice should perhaps be, as in the case of 'hearing the voice of adjuration'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. V, 1: He heareth the voice of adjuration, he being a witness; v. infra Ch. IV.');">¹</span> and 'swearing clearly with the lips'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 4: If anyone swear clearly with his lips to evil or to do good; v. infra p. 1, n. 1.');">²</span>

אמר קרא (ויקרא ה, ג) בה בה למעוטי תרומה

[where a sliding scale sacrifice is brought for unwitting transgression, though neither Kareth nor death [by divine intervention] is inflicted for wilful transgression]? - Scripture says: [Whatsoever his uncleanness be] by which [he becomes unclean.]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 3. vc');">³</span> By which, excludes Terumah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The word , by which, is superfluous, and is taken to limit the applications of the law to some extent, i.e., to exclude a sacrifice for the lesser transgression; so that only for eating holy food while unclean is a sacrifice brought, but not for eating Terumah while unclean.');">⁴</span>

אימא בה למעוטי מקדש דלא סגי ליה בקרבן עולה ויורד עד דמייתי קרבן קבוע

Let us rather say that by which excludes Temple [and holy food] in that a sliding scale sacrifice shall not suffice, but a fixed sacrifice be necessary? Raba said of Rabbi: He draws water from deep pits;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., shows great erudition. Here follows another argument to deduce that holy food and Temple are included, and Terumah excluded.');">⁵</span>

קרי רבא עליה דרבי דולה מים מבורות עמוקים

for it was taught: Rabbi said: I read, [If any one touch any unclean thing, whether it be the carcass of an unclean] beast [or the carcass of unclean cattle.].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. V, 2.');">⁶</span> Why should cattle be written?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cattle is included in beast. V. Lev. XI, 2, 3: These are the beasts which ye may eat . . whatsoever parteth the hoof . . among the cattle . .');">⁷</span>

דתניא רבי אומר אקרא אני חיה בהמה למה נאמרה נאמר כאן (ויקרא ה, ב) בהמה טמאה ונאמר להלן (ויקרא ז, כא) בהמה טמאה מה להלן טומאת קודש אף כאן טומאת קודש

- [To deduce the following:] Here it is said unclean cattle, and further on it is said unclean cattle.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. VII, 21: And when anyone shall touch any unclean thing, whether it be the uncleanness of man or unclean cattle . . and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which pertain unto the Lord, that soul shall be cut off from his people.');">⁸</span> Just as there it refers to eating holy food while unclean, so here it refers to eating holy food while unclean.

אשכחן טומאת קודש טומאת מקדש מנלן אמר קרא (ויקרא יב, ד) בכל קדש לא תגע ואל המקדש לא תבא איתקש מקדש לקודש

Thus we deduce the law regarding eating holy food while unclean; whence do we deduce the law regarding entering the Temple while unclean? - Scripture says: She shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XII, 4: referring to a woman after childbirth.');">⁹</span> Sanctuary is equated with holy food.

אי הכי תרומה נמי דאמר מר בכל קדש לא תגע לרבות את התרומה

- If so, Terumah also [should be included for sliding scale sacrifice, if eaten while unclean], for i has been said that she shall touch no hallowed thing includes Terumah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mak. 14b.');">¹⁰</span> - [No!] Scripture limits the application of the law by the expression, by which.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 22, n. 5.');">¹¹</span>

הא מיעט רחמנא בה אימא בה למעוטי מקדש מסתברא מקדש לא ממעטינן שכן בכרת כמותה

- Let us say that the expression by which excludes Temple [and not Terumah]? - It is reasonable not to exclude Temple, because the same punishment, Kareth, is inflicted [for wilfully entering the Temple, or eating holy food, while unclean].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whereas the wilful eating of Terumah while unclean is not punishable by Kareth.');">¹²</span> - On the contrary, Terumah should not be excluded, because the act of transgression consists of eating, just as in the case of holy food [whereas in the case of the Temple, it is entering it which constitutes the transgression]?

אדרבה תרומה לא ממעטינן שכן אכילה כמותה

Well then, said Raba:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Another argument for including Temple and holy food, and excluding Terumah.');">¹³</span> Why is the punishment of Kareth for eating peace offerings [i.e., holy food] while unclean mentioned three times in Holy Writ?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' (a) Lev. XXII, 3: Whosoever he be . . that approacheth unto the holy things . . having his uncleanness upon him, that soul shall be cut off.');">¹⁴</span>

אלא אמר רבא שלש כריתות בשלמים למה אחת לכלל ואחת לפרט ואחת לטומאה הכתובה בתורה סתם ואיני יודע מה היא

- Once for a general statement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII. 3: Whosoever he be . . that approacheth unto the holy things. This is a generalisation - holy things; Lev. VII, 20: Anyone that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of the peace offerings. This is a particular specification - peace offerings. Now, peace offerings are included in holy things: why should they be specified separately? - In order that we may deduce that only holy things which are sacrificed on the altar (as are peace offerings) are included in the law regarding uncleanness, but offerings for the Temple repair are excluded. (Rashi.)');">¹⁵</span> once for a particular, and once for the uncleanness written in the Torah without being defined,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Kareth in Lev. VII, 21, being superfluous, is for the purpose of teaching that it is the punishment for the witting transgression of that sin');">¹⁶</span>

הוי אומר טומאת קודש ואם אינו ענין לטומאת קודש דנפקא ליה מדרבי תנהו ענין לטומאת מקדש

so that I know not what it means. You may say, then, it means eating holy food while unclean; and since it is unnecessary to have another prohibition for eating holy food while unclean, for I deduce that from Rabbi's statement, you may utilise the prohibition for entering the Temple while unclean.

והאי מיבעי ליה לכדרבי אבהו דאמר רבי אבהו שלש כריתות בשלמים למה אחת לכלל ואחת לפרט ואחת לדברים שאינן נאכלין

- But this [extra Kareth] we require for R'Abbahu's deduction! For R'Abbahu said: Why does Scripture mention Kareth three times for eating peace offerings [while unclean]? - Once for a general statement, once for a particular, and once for things which are not eaten.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as incense. If he eats it wittingly while unclean, the transgressor is punished by Kareth.');">¹⁷</span> And according to R'Simeon who holds that things which are not eaten are not punishable by Kareth if eaten during uncleanness,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Zeb. 45b.');">¹⁸</span>

ולר"ש דאמר דברים שאינן נאכלין אין חייבין עליהן כרת משום טומאה לאיתויי חטאת הפנימית דס"ד אמינא הואיל ואמר ר"ש כל שאינו קרב על מזבח החיצון כשלמים אין חייבין עליו משום פיגול משום טומאה נמי לא קמ"ל דמיחייב

[we still require the extra Kareth to deduce that] the 'inner' sin offerings<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as the bullock and goat offered on the Day of Atonement, whose blood is sprinkled within the veil.');">¹⁹</span> are included;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Eating them while unclean is punishable by Kareth for witting, and sliding scale sacrifice for unwitting, transgression. kudhp');">²⁰</span>

אלא אמרי נהרדעי משמי' דרבא שלש טומאות בשלמים למה אחת לכלל ואחת לפרט ואחת לטומאה הכתובה בתורה סתם ואיני יודע מה היא

for we might have thought that, since R'Simeon holds that sacrifices which are not offered on the outer altar, as are peace offerings, are not subject to the law of piggul,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 43a. (abomination, Lev. VII, 18; XIX, 7, 8) is a sacrifice left over beyond the time limit for its consumption; its eating is punishable by Kareth. Piggul is mentioned only in connection with peace offerings. The 'inner' sin offerings, according to R. Simeon, are, therefore, not subject to the law of piggul.');">²¹</span> therefore they are also not subject to the law of uncleanness;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Anyone eating an 'inner' sin offering while unclean would not be liable to Kareth for witting transgression, or sliding scale sacrifice for unwitting transgression.');">²²</span>

הוי אומר טומאת קודש ואם אינו ענין לטומאת קודש דנפקא ליה מדרבי תנהו ענין לטומאת מקדש

he therefore teaches us that they are. [The third Kareth, then, is necessar for this deduction.

והאי נמי מיבעי ליה איידי דבעי למכתב כרת לכדר' אבהו כתב נמי טמאות דלא סגי לה בלאו הכי

How then shall we deduce that an unclean person entering the Temple brings a sliding scale sacrifice? ] - Well then, the Nehardeans say in the name of Raba:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Another version of Raba's statement.');">²³</span> Why does Scripture mention 'uncleanness' three times<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXII, 13: having his uncleanness upon him; Lev. VII, 20: having his uncleanness upon him; Lev. VII, 21: when anyone shall touch any unclean thing.');">²⁴</span>

אלא אמר רבא אתיא טומאתו טומאתו כתיב הכא (ויקרא ה, ג) לכל טומאתו

in connection with peace offerings? - Once for a generalisation, once for a particular, and once for the uncleanness written in the Torah without being explained, so that I know not what it means. You may say then, it refers to eating holy food while unclean, and since it is unnecessary to have another prohibition for that, for I deduce that from Rabbi's statement, you may utilise the prohibition for entering the Temple while unclean. But this [extra word 'uncleanness'] we also require; since Scripture had to write [the extra] Kareth for R'Abbahu's deduction, it perforce had to write also [the extra] 'uncleanness', for without it the phrase would have been meaningless? - Well then, said Raba: We deduce [that an unclean person entering the Temple brings a sliding scale sacrifice] from [the similarity of phrases] 'his uncleanness', 'his uncleanness'. Here it is written: [If he touch the uncleanness of man] whatsoever his uncleanness be.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. V, 3.');">²⁵</span>