Mishnayos Meilah Perek 1 Mishnah 1
Change text layout:
מעילה פרק א׳ משנה א׳
Offerings of the most sacred order that were disqualified before their blood was sprinkled on the altar, e.g., if one slaughtered them in the south of the Temple courtyard, and not in the north as required, are subject to the following halakha: One is liable for misusing them, i.e., one who derives benefit from them must bring a guilt offering and pay the principal and an additional one-fifth of their value. If he improperly slaughtered them in the south of the courtyard and properly collected their blood in the north, or even if he properly slaughtered them in the north of the courtyard but improperly collected their blood in the south, although the more significant rite was performed improperly, one is liable for misuse if he derives benefit from the animals. The same halakha that applies if the location of the sacrificial rites was altered likewise applies if the time of those rites was altered. Accordingly, if one properly slaughtered them during the day and improperly sprinkled their blood at night, or if he improperly slaughtered them at night and properly sprinkled their blood during the day, one is liable for misuse if he derives benefit from the animals. Or in a case where one slaughtered them with the intent to partake of their meat or sprinkle their blood beyond its designated time, rendering it piggul, or outside its designated area, disqualifying the offering, he is liable for misusing them if he derives benefit from the animals. Rabbi Yehoshua stated a principle with regard to misuse of disqualified sacrificial animals: With regard to any sacrificial animal that had a period of fitness to the priests before it was disqualified, one is not liable for misusing it. Misuse applies specifically to items consecrated to God, which are not permitted for human consumption at all. Once the offering was permitted for consumption by the priests, it is no longer in that category. And with regard to any sacrificial animal that did not have a period of fitness for the priests before it was disqualified, one is liable for misusing it if he derives benefit from it, as it remained consecrated to God throughout. Which is the sacrificial animal that had a period of fitness for the priests? This category includes a sacrificial animal whose meat remained overnight after its blood was presented on the altar and therefore came to have the status of notar and was therefore disqualified, and one that was disqualified when it became ritually impure, and one that left the Temple courtyard and was thereby disqualified. All of these disqualifications transpired after consumption of the sacrificial meat was permitted, and therefore one who derives benefit from these offerings is not liable for misuse. And which is the sacrificial animal that did not have a period of fitness for the priests? It is a sacrificial animal that was slaughtered with the intent to partake of it or sprinkle its blood beyond its designated time, or outside its designated area, or one that those unfit for Temple service collected and sprinkled its blood. All of these disqualifications took effect before consumption of the sacrificial meat was permitted. The offerings therefore remain consecrated to God, and one is liable for misuse if he derives benefit from them.
קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים שֶׁשְּׁחָטָן בַּדָּרוֹם, מוֹעֲלִים בָּהֶן. שְׁחָטָן בַּדָּרוֹם וְקִבֵּל דָּמָן בַּצָּפוֹן, בַּצָּפוֹן וְקִבֵּל דָּמָן בַּדָּרוֹם, שְׁחָטָן בַּיּוֹם וְזָרַק בַּלַּיְלָה, בַּלַּיְלָה וְזָרַק בַּיּוֹם, אוֹ שֶׁשְּׁחָטָן חוּץ לִזְמַנָּן וְחוּץ לִמְקוֹמָן, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, כֹּל שֶׁהָיָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הֶתֵּר לַכֹּהֲנִים, אֵין מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ. וְשֶׁלֹּא הָיָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הֶתֵּר לַכֹּהֲנִים, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ. אֵיזוֹ הִיא שֶׁהָיָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הֶתֵּר לַכֹּהֲנִים. שֶׁלָּנָה, וְשֶׁנִּטְמְאָה, וְשֶׁיָּצְאָה. אֵיזוֹ הִיא שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה לָהּ שְׁעַת הֶתֵּר לַכֹּהֲנִים. שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲטָה חוּץ לִזְמַנָּהּ, חוּץ לִמְקוֹמָהּ, וְשֶׁקִּבְּלוּ פְסוּלִין וְזָרְקוּ אֶת דָּמָהּ:
Bartenura
קדשי קדשים ששחטן בדרום. אע״פ שדינן להשחט בצפון, לא תימא כמאן דחנקינהו דמו והוו כקדשים שמתו שיצאו ידי מעילה דבר תורה, קמשמע לן דקדשים שמתו לא חזו כלל, אבל דרום נהי דאינו ראוי לקדשי קדשים אבל ראוי הוא לקדשים קלים הלכך מועלין בהן, ומי שנהנה מהם שוה פרוטה מביא קרבן מעילה. ולא בלבד כי נשחטו בדרום וקבל דמן בצפון הוא דמועלין בהן משום דעיקר עבודה בצפון הוי [כדין], דמקבלה ואילך מצות כהונה, אלא אפילו שחטן בצפון וקבל דמן בדרום, אף על גב דעיקר עבודה הויא בדרום שלא כדין, אפילו הכי מועלין בהן:
וזרק דמן בלילה. אע״ג דלילה לאו זמן הקרבה, מועלין בהן:
בלילה וזרק דמן ביום. האי כל שכן הוא דמועלין, דהא זרק ביום דעיקר עבודה הוא. אלא זו ואין צריך לומר זו קתני:
או ששחטן. בצפון, וחשב עליהן לאכלן חוץ לזמנן שהוא פגול שיש בו כרת, או חוץ למקומן שהוא פסול שאין בו כרת, מועלים בהן:
כלל אמר ר׳ יהושע כל שהיה לה שעת היתר לכהנים. אע״ג דשוב נפסלה ואין רשאים לאכלן, אפילו הכי אין מועלין בהן:
שלנה. לאחר זריקה, או שנטמאה או שיצאה חוץ לעזרה לאחר זריקה. אע״ג דאינה ראויה לכהנים, כיון דהיה לה שעה אחת היתר קודם שלנה, אין מועלים בה, דלאו קדשי ה׳ קרינן בה, דהא חזו לכהנים:
ושקבלו פסולים וזרקו את דמה. קבלו פסולים את דמה אע״פ שזרקוהו כשרים, או שזרקוהו פסולים אע״פ שקבלוהו כשרים. ואם לאחר שקבלו פסולים את הדם וזרקוהו, חזרו כשרים וקבלו שאר דם הנפש וזרקוהו, הרי זריקת הכשרים מועלת ומתרת הבשר לכהנים ואין בו משום מעילה. והני מילי שאר פסולים חוץ מן הטמא, אבל טמא שקבל את הדם וזרקו, אע״פ שחזרו כשרים וקבלו שאר דם הנפש וזרקוהו, אין לבשר שעת היתר ומועלים בו, שהטמא הואיל וראוי לעבודת צבור, שקרבן צבור דוחה את הטומאה, כשזרק הדם נעשה שאר הדם שיריים ושוב אין זריקת הכשרים מועלת להתיר הבשר, ואין לך בפסולים מי שעושה הדם שיריים אלא הטמא בלבד:
קדשי קדשים ששחטן בדרום – even though that their law is to be slaughtered in the north [part of the Temple courtyard] (see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 5, Mishnah 1), do not say that is like the one that is strangled (see Talmud Meilah 2a) for they were like Holy Things that died when they left the realm of religious sacrilege according to the Written Torah, that it comes to tell us that Holy Things/sacrifices that died are not worthy at all. But the south [part of the Temple courtyard] assuming that it is not appropriate for the Holy of Holies but is appropriate for offerings of lesser sanctity, therefore, they commit religious sacrilege with them, but a person who benefits from them the equivalent of a perutah/penny brings the sacrifice for religious sacrilege. But not only that they were slaughtered in the south and their blood was received In the north that one commits religious sacrilege because the essence of Divine service in the north is [according to law], and from the received tradition and onward, it is the commandment of the priesthood, but even if they were slaughtered in the north and the received their blood in the south, even though tha t the essence of the Divine service is in the south not according to the law, even so, they commit religious sacrilege through them.
וזרק דמו בלילה – even though that night is not the time of offering [of the sacrifice), one commits religious sacrilege with them
בלילה וזרק דמן ביום – his all the more so that one is committing religious sacrilege, because he sprinkled [the blood] during the day, which is the essence of Divine service. But it is taught “this but one doesn’t have to state that.”
או ששחטן – [slaughtered them] in the north , and he thought about eating them outside of their time which is פיגול/an offering disqualified by improper intention which is punishable by extirpation/כרת , or outside of their place which is disqualified which does not have [punishment of] extirpation, one commits religious sacrilege through them.
כלל אמר ר' יהושע כל שהיה לה שעת היתר לכהנים – even though it once again became disqualified and they are not permitted to eat them, nevertheless, we don’t commit religious sacrilege with them.
שלנה – after sprinkling, or that it became defiled or that went outside of the courtyard after the sprinkling [of the blood], even though that it is not appropriate for the Kohanim, since it had one hour of availability to [for use[ prior to being left overnight, we don’t commit religious sacrilege with it, for we don’t call it “God’s holy things,” for it was appropriate for the Kohanim.
ושקבלו פסולים וזרקו את דמה (the blood of which disqualified men have received or tossed) – the ineligible had received its blood, even though that those that sprinkled/tossed it were fit, or that those who sprinkled it were disqualified, even though who received it were fit. But if after the disqualified had received the blood and sprinkled it, the fit [priests] returned and received the rest of the lifeblood (i.e., the last blood that exits before the animal is dead -which is about one-fourth of a LOG – see Tractate Zevakhim, Chapter 3, Mishnah 1 ) and sprinkled it, thereby the sprinkling by the fit is makes inappropriate use of sacred property, but permits the meat to the Kohanim, there isn’t religious sacrilege. And these words refer to the rest of the disqualified, other than those who are ritually impure, but someone ritually impure who received the blood and sprinkled it, even though the fit returned and received the rest of the lifeblood [of the animal] and sprinkled it, the meat did not have a period of availability [for use by the Kohanim] and one commits religious sacrilege, for the ritually impure, since is appropriate for the Divine Service of the community, as the sacrifice of the community postpones the ritual defilement, when he he tossed the blood, the rest of he blood became remnants, and furthermore, the tossing by the fit of the blood is not an inappropriate use of sacred property to permit the meat, and among the disqualified, you don’t have an individual who makes the blood of the remnants other than the ritually impure alone.