Sanhedrin

A zar who ate terumah: Rab said: A zar who ate terumah is flagellated. R. Kahana and R. Assi said to him: Why does not the master say — is liable to death, since it is written, there shall no stranger eat of the holy thing?  — I the Lord do sanctify them breaks across the subject.  An objection is raised: The following are liable to death: … a zar who ate terumah? — Do you oppose a Baraitha to Rab's ruling? Rab is a Tanna, and may dispute [the ruling of Baraitha. 'A zar who performed the [Temple] service': for it is written, And the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death. 'Or an unclean [priest] who performed the [Temple] service:' even as R. Hiyya b. Abin inquired of R. Joseph: Whence do we know that an unclean priest who performed the [Temple] service is punished by death? Because it is written, Speak unto Aaron, and to his sons, that they separate themselves from the holy things of the children of Israel, and that they profane not my holy name.  And identity of law is derived from the use of 'profanation' here and in the case of terumah; just as there the penalty is death, so here too. But should not the deduction rather be made from nothar: just as there the penalty is extinction, so here too? — It is reasonable to make the deduction from terumah, because they have the following in common: — [i] bodily [unfitness], [ii] uncleanliness, [iii] mikweh, [iv] plural form.  On the contrary, should not the deduction rather be made from nothar, since they share the following in common: [i] sanctity, [ii] within [the Temple court], [iii] piggul and [iv] nothar?  — Even so, the fact that in both cases [viz. terumah and the sacrificial service] profanation is spoken of as an act of many [unlike nothar], outweighs [the points which sacrificial service and nothar have in common]. 'Or one who performed it on the day of his ritual bath'. Whence do we know this? — Even as has been taught: R. Simai said: Where is the allusion that one who officiated in the Temple on the day of his ritual bath has committed an act of profanation? From the verse, They shall be holy unto their God, and not profane [the name of their God].  Since this cannot refer to the ministration of an unclean priest, [the prohibition of which] is derived from that they separate themselves,  apply it to a priest's officiating on the day of his ritual bath. Then an analogy is drawn from the use of 'profanation' both here and in the case of terumah: just as there, the penalty is death, so here too. 'Or lacking the proper priestly garments'. Whence do we know it? — R. Abbahu said in R. Johanan's name, and [the teaching] is ultimately derived from R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon: [The Writ saith, And thou shalt … put coats upon them…] and thou shalt gird them with girdles. [Aaron and his sons, and put the bonnets on them': and the priest's office shall be theirs for a perpetual state]:  when wearing the appointed garments, they are invested in their priesthood; when not, they lack their priesthood and are considered zarim,  and a Master hath said, A zar who performs the [Temple] service is liable to death. 'Or one lacking the sacrificial atonement — Whence do we know this? — R. Huna said: The Writ saith, And the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.  'And she shall be clean' implies that hitherto she was unclean: and a Master hath said, An unclean priest who officiated is liable to death. 'One who did not wash his hands or feet.' Whence do we know this? — From the verse, When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not. 'Or drank wine'. Because it is written, Do not drink wine or strong drink, [thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die]. 'Or a priest with overgrown locks'. As it is written, Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to remain unshorn;  and this is followed by, Neither shall they drink wine:  hence the former is likened to the latter: just as the latter is liable to death, so the former too. 'But the performance of the service by an uncircumcised [priest], an onen, or [by one who officiated whilst sitting is not liable to death, but merely prohibited.' Whence do we know it of the uncircumcised? — R. Hisda said: We did not learn this from the Torah of Moses our Teacher, until Ezekiel the son of Buzi came and taught it to us: No stranger, uncircumcised in heart,