Zevachim

but the Sages made their law even stricter than Scripture. 1 Our Rabbis taught: ‘For so I am commanded’; ‘as I commanded’; ‘as the Lord hath commanded’:2 ‘For so I am commanded’ that they should eat it during their bereavement [aninuth]; ‘As I commanded’, when it happened;3 ‘As the Lord commanded’, I did not bid you [to do this] on my own authority. But the following contradicts it: [The sin-offering] was burnt on account of aninuth, for which reason it is said, [And there have befallen me] such things as these?4 — Said Samuel, There is no difficulty: one agrees with R. Nehemiah, the other with R. Judah and R. Simeon. For it was taught: They burnt it because of aninuth; therefore it is stated, ‘such things as these’: these are the words of R. Nehemiah. R. Judah and R. Simeon maintained: It was burnt because of defilement, for if because of bereavement, they should have burnt the three.5 Another argument: they would have been fit to eat them in the evening.6 Another argument: surely Phinehas was with them!7 Raba said: Both agree with R. Nehemiah, yet there is no difficulty: one refers to special ad hoc sacrifices, and the other to regular sacrifices.8 Now, how does R. Nehemiah explain these texts, and how do the Rabbis9 explain these texts? — R. Nehemiah explains it thus: ‘Wherefore have ye not eaten etc?’10 ‘Perhaps’, said Moses to Aaron, ‘its blood entered the innermost sanctuary?’11 ‘Behold, the blood of it was not brought [into the sanctuary within]’, he answered. ‘Perhaps it passed without its barrier?’12 he suggested. ‘It was in the sanctuary’, he replied. ‘And perhaps ye offered it in bereavement, and thus disqualified it?’ ‘Moses’, replied he, ‘did they, [my sons] offer it: I offered it?’13 Thereupon he exclaimed, ‘Behold, the blood of it was not brought within, and it was in the sanctuary,14 then ye should certainly have eaten it, as I commanded, [viz.,] that they should eat it in their bereavement.’ Said he to him: ‘And there have befallen me such things as these, and if I had eaten the sin-offering to-day, would it have been pleasing in the sight of the Lord? perhaps you heard thus15 only about the special sacrifices? For if [you would apply it] to the regular sacrifices, [you may argue] a minori from tithe, which is of lesser holiness,16 [that it is not so]. For if the Torah said of tithe, which is of lesser holiness, I have not eaten thereof in my mourning,17 how much the more does it apply to sacrifices, which are more holy?’18 Forthwith, and when Moses heard that, it was pleasing in his sight.19 He admitted [his error], and Moses was not ashamed [to excuse himself] by saying, ‘I had not heard it’, but said, ‘I heard it and forgot. How do R. Judah and R. Simeon explain these verses? — They explain it thus: ‘Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin-offering’: perhaps the blood entered the innermost sanctuary? ‘Behold, the blood of it was not brought into the sanctuary within’, he replied. Perhaps it passed without its barrier? It was in the sanctuary, was his answer. And perhaps ye offered it in bereavement, and thus disqualified it? Moses, replied he, did they offer it, that bereavement should disqualify? I offered it. And perhaps ye were negligent through your grief, and it was defiled? Moses, he exclaimed, am I thus in your eyes, that I would despise Divine sacrifices? ‘And there have befallen me such things as these’, and even many more, yet would I not despise Divine sacrifices. If then, said he, ‘behold, the blood of it was not brought within, and it was in the sanctuary, then ye should certainly have eaten it, as I commanded’, [viz.] that they should eat it in their bereavement! Perhaps you heard thus only of the night,20 he suggested; for if [you would apply it to] the day, [you may argue] a minori from tithe, which is of lesser holiness, [that it is not so]. For if the Torah said of tithe, which is of lesser holiness, ‘I have not eaten thereof in my mourning’, how much the more does it apply to sacrifices, which are more holy! Forthwith, ‘and when Moses heard that, death, the Rabbis decreed aninuth on the day of burial and on the night following. peace-offering. These three were brought at the consecration of Aaron and his sons into the priesthood, and Moses ordered them to eat them, adding, For so I am commanded etc. instructed that they were to eat it in bereavement. who maintains that it does, admits that on that occasion it did not (supra 100b). only was it burnt. is written, ‘for so I am commanded’. Now, that meal-offering was a special sacrifice, and was permitted by a special dispensation. The sin-offering, however, was the ordinary New Moon sin-offering (this happened on New Moon). Moses erroneously thought that what he had been told about the meal-offering also applied to the sin-offering, and was therefore angry that it was burnt. Aaron, however, pointed out that he might have been told only about the special meal-offering, and Moses then admitted that he was right. offered it, and I, being the High priest, was permitted to do so.