Zevachim

for its own purpose?1 — If so, let Scripture say, ‘It shall be eaten on the day of its slaughtering’: what is the purpose of ‘that he offereth’? Infer from it: on the day that you slaughter, you can offer; on the day that you do not slaughter, you cannot offer. Yet perhaps this is what the Divine Law means: If he [the priest] presents the blood on the same day, you may eat the flesh on the same day and on the next; while if he presents the blood on the morrow, you may eat the flesh on the morrow and on the day after? — If so, let Scripture write, ‘It shall be eaten on the day that he offereth’; what is the purpose of ‘his slaughtering’? Infer from it: On the day that you slaughter, you can offer: on the day that you do not slaughter, you cannot offer. It was stated: If one intends [eating the flesh] on the evening of the third day,2 Hezekiah said: It [the sacrifice] is fit; R. Johanan said: It is unfit. Hezekiah said: It is fit, seeing that it was not yet relegated to the fire.3 R. Johanan said: It is unfit, seeing that it is rejected from eating. 4 If one eats [the flesh] on the evening of the third day, Hezekiah maintained: He is exempt,5 seeing that it was not yet relegated to the fire; R. Johanan maintained, He is culpable, seeing that it was rejected from eating. It was taught in accordance with R. Johanan: With regard to sacrifices which are eaten on the same day [only], an intention is effective in respect of their blood from sunset, and in respect of their flesh and their emurim, from dawn.6 But as to sacrifices which are eaten two days and one night, an intention is effective in respect of their blood from sunset; in respect of their emurim, from dawn; and in respect of their flesh, from sunset on the second day.7 Our Rabbis taught: You might think that they [peace-offerings] may be eaten on the evening of the third day, and this is indeed logical. Some sacrifices are eaten on the same day, and others are eaten during two days; as those sacrifices which are eaten on the same day [only], the night follows them;8 so also the sacrifices which are eaten during two days, the night follows them. Therefore it says, And if aught remain until the third day:9 while it is yet day it may be eaten, but it may not be eaten on the evening of the third day. You might think that it is burnt immediately,10 and this is logical: some sacrifices are eaten on the same day, and others are eaten during two days: as the sacrifices which are eaten on the same day, burning immediately follows eating;11 so the sacrifices which are eaten during two days, burning immediately follows eating. Therefore it says, ‘On the third day it shall be burnt with fire’: you must burn it by day, but you must not burn it at night. MISHNAH. THE FIRSTLING, TITHE12 AND PASSOVER-OFFERING ARE SACRIFICES OF LESSER SANCTITY. THEY ARE SLAUGHTERED IN ANY PART OF THE TEMPLE COURT, AND THEIR BLOOD REQUIRES ONE SPRINKLING, PROVIDED THAT IT IS APPLIED OVER AGAINST THE BASE.13 THEY DIFFERED IN THEIR CONSUMPTION [AS FOLLOWS]: THE FIRSTLING WAS EATEN BY PRIESTS [ONLY], WHILE THE TITHE MIGHT BE EATEN BY ANY MAN. AND THEY WERE EATEN IN ANY PART OF THE CITY, PREPARED IN ANY MANNER, DURING TWO DAYS AND ONE NIGHT. THE PASSOVER-OFFERING MIGHT BE EATEN ONLY AT NIGHT, ONLY UNTIL MIDNIGHT, AND IT MIGHT BE EATEN ONLY BY THOSE REGISTERED FOR IT,14 AND IT MIGHT BE EATEN ONLY ROASTED. GEMARA. Which Tanna [rules thus]?15 — Said R. Hisda, It is R. Jose the Galilean. For it was taught, R. Jose the Galilean said: Not ‘its blood’ is said, but ‘their blood’; not ‘its fat’ is said, but ‘their fat’: this teaches concerning the firstling, tithe, and the Passover-offering, that their blood and emurim must be presented at the altar.16 How do we know [that it must be sprinkled] over against the base? — Said R. Eleazar: The meaning of ‘sprinkling’17 is learned from a burnt-offering. until the morning (v.v. 17). Hence the intention to eat it then, expressed at the sacrificing, does not invalidate it. morrow, his intention makes the sacrifice unfit. respect of sprinkling and presentation of emurim. Whose view is this?