Zevachim 7

חַטַּאת הָעוֹף שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ לְמַטָּה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, כְּשֵׁרָה. כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה עוֹלָה לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה עוֹלָה לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה, פְּסוּלָה. עֲשָׂאָהּ לְמַעְלָה כְּמַעֲשֵׂה כֻלָּם, פְּסוּלָה:

[If the procedure for] a <i>Chattat</i> [offerings brought to expiate sin] of a bird was performed [correctly] below [the altar's midpoint] according to the procedure of a <i>Chattat</i> for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is valid. [If the] procedure for a <i>Chattat</i> [was performed but] for the sake of an <i>Olah</i> [an offering that is entirely burnt], [or if the] procedure [was performed] according to that of an <i>Olah</i> [but] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, [or if the] procedure [was performed] according to that of an <i>Olah</i> [and] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is invalid. [If the blood] was applied above [the altar's midpoint] according to either procedure, it is invalid.

עוֹלַת הָעוֹף שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ לְמַעְלָה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה עוֹלָה לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה, כְּשֵׁרָה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה עוֹלָה לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, כְּשֵׁרָה, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא עָלְתָה לַבְּעָלִים. כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, פְּסוּלָה. עֲשָׂאָהּ לְמַטָּה כְּמַעֲשֵׂה כֻלָּן, פְּסוּלָה:

[If the procedure for] an <i>Olah</i> of a bird was performed [correctly] above [the altar's midpoint] according to the procedure of a burnt-offering for the sake of an <i>Olah</i>, it is valid. [If the] procedure for an <i>Olah</i> [was performed but] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is valid but it has not fulfilled its owner's obligation. [If the] procedure [was performed] according to that of a <i>Chattat</i> [but] for the sake of an <i>Olah</i>, [or if the] procedure [was performed] according to that of a <i>Chattat</i> [and] for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>, it is invalid. [If the blood] was applied below [the altar's midpoint] according to either procedure, it is invalid.

וְכֻלָּן אֵינָן מְטַמְּאוֹת בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה, וּמוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, חוּץ מֵחַטַּאת הָעוֹף שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ לְמַטָּה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת:

None of these [cases listed above] render one impure through swallowing [as is the case with the ingestion of impure kosher birds], but they are subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> [misuse of consecrated property], with the exception of the <i>Chattat</i> of a bird [whose blood was] applied below [the altar's midpoint], following the procedure of a <i>Chattat</i> and for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i>.

עוֹלַת הָעוֹף שֶׁעֲשָׂאָהּ לְמַטָּה, כְּמַעֲשֵׂה חַטָּאת לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, אֵין מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, מָה אִם חַטָּאת, שֶׁאֵין מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ לִשְׁמָהּ, כְּשֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ, מוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ, עוֹלָה, שֶׁמּוֹעֲלִין בָּהּ לִשְׁמָהּ, כְּשֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּמְעֲלוּ בָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בְחַטָּאת שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְשֵׁם עוֹלָה שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְדָבָר שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ מְעִילָה, תֹּאמַר בְּעוֹלָה שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְשֵׁם חַטָּאת, שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְדָבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מְעִילָה. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וַהֲרֵי קָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים שֶׁשְּׁחָטָן בַּדָּרוֹם וּשְׁחָטָן לְשֵׁם קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים יוֹכִיחוּ, שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָן לְדָבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מְעִילָה, וּמוֹעֲלִין בָּהֶן, אַף אַתָּה אַל תִּתְמַהּ עַל הָעוֹלָה, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ לְדָבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מְעִילָה, שֶׁיִּמְעֲלוּ בָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בְקָדְשֵׁי קָדָשִׁים, שֶׁשְׁחָטָן בַּדָּרוֹם וּשְׁחָטָן לְשֵׁם קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים, שֶׁכֵּן שִׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָן בְּדָבָר שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ אִסּוּר וְהֶתֵּר, תֹּאמַר בְּעוֹלָה שֶׁשִּׁנָּה אֶת שְׁמָהּ בְּדָבָר שֶׁכֻּלּוֹ הֶתֵּר:

[Regarding] the <i>Olah</i> of a bird whose blood was applied below [the altar's midpoint], following the procedure of a<i>Chattat</i> and for the sake of a <i>Chattat</i> - Rabbi Eliezer says it is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>. Rabbi Yehoshua says it is not subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>. Rabbi Eliezer said: If a <i>Chattat</i> which does not subject one to <i>Me'ilah</i> [when performed] for its own sake, [yet] does subject one to <i>Me'ilah</i> if [performed] for the sake of something else, is it not logical that an <i>Olah</i> which does subject one to <i>Me'ilah</i> [when performed] for its own sake, should [certainly make one] subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> [when performed] for the sake of something else? Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: No, you refer to a <i>Chattat</i> which was [performed] for the sake of an <i>Olah</i> [and is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>] because he changed its objective to something which is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>; will you say [the same] for an <i>Olah</i> where he changed his objective to a <i>Chattat</i> [considering] he has changed the objective to something not subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>? Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Consider,<i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> [sacrifices of the highest degree of sanctity. They may be slaughtered only on the north-west corner of the altar, and consumed only within the Temple compound by male priests, or burnt entirely] that were slaughtered on the south [side of the altar and] that were slaughtered for the sake of sacrifices of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i> [sacrifices of a lesser degree of sanctity. They may be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple courtyard and consumed by most anyone, anywhere in Jerusalem] - these prove the point, because he changed their objective to something that is not subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> and yet one is subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> over them. Thus you should not be surprised [with regard to] a <i>Chattat</i> [where] even though one has changed its objective to something that does not make one subject to <i>Me'ilah</i>, one can still be subject to <i>Me'ilah</i> [over it]. Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: No, you refer to <i>Kodshai Kodashim</i> that were slaughtered on the south [side of the altar] and were slaughtered for the sake of <i>Kodashim Kalim</i>, and that he changed their objective to something that comprises both forbidden and permitted things; would you say the same thing regarding a <i>Olah</i> whose objective was changed to something that is entirely permitted?

מָלַק בִּשְׂמֹאל, אוֹ בַלַּיְלָה, שָׁחַט חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, וְקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, אֵינָן מְטַמְּאִין בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. מָלַק בְּסַכִּין, מָלַק חֻלִּין בִּפְנִים, וְקָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ, תּוֹרִין שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּן, וּבְנֵי יוֹנָה שֶׁעָבַר זְמַנָּן, שֶׁיָּבַשׁ גַּפָּה, וְשֶׁנִּסְמֵת עֵינָהּ, וְשֶׁנִּקְטְעָה רַגְלָהּ, מְטַמֵּא בְבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כֹּל שֶׁהָיָה פְסוּלָהּ בַּקֹּדֶשׁ, אֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה בְבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. לֹא הָיָה פְסוּלָהּ בַּקֹּדֶשׁ, מְטַמְּאָה בְבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. וְכָל הַפְּסוּלִים שֶׁמָּלְקוּ, מְלִיקָתָן פְּסוּלָה, וְאֵינָן מְטַמְּאוֹת בְּבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה:

If one ֹpierced [the neck of a bird] with his left hand, or [did it] at night, [or] if he slaughtered non-consecrated animals inside the Temple courtyard, [or] consecrated animals outside the Temple courtyard - these do not render a person impure through swallowing [as is the case with the ingestion of impure kosher birds]. If one severed [the head] with a knife, [or] if one pierced [the neck] of a non-consecrated [bird] inside the Temple courtyard, [or that of] a consecrated [bird] outside the Temple courtyard, [or the necks of] turtle-doves that are not yet old enough [to be sacrificed, or those of] pigeons that are too old [to be sacrificed, or that of a bird] whose wing has dried out, or who has a blind eye, or whose leg was cut off - these render a person impure through swallowing. This is the general rule: Anything that was made invalid inside the Temple courtyard does not render a person impure through swallowing. If it was not made invalid inside the Temple courtyard [but outside], it does render a person impure through swallowing. [In all cases where] ineligible people pierce [birds' necks], their piercings are invalid, but [the birds] do not render a person impure through swallowing.

מָלַק וְנִמְצָא טְרֵפָה, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה בְבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מְטַמְּאָה בְבֵית הַבְּלִיעָה. אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, מָה אִם נִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה, שֶׁהִיא מְטַמְּאָה בְמַגָּע וּבְמַשָּׂא, שְׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהֶרֶת אֶת טְרֵפָתָהּ מִטֻּמְאָתָהּ, נִבְלַת הָעוֹף שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה בְמַגָּע וּבְמַשָּׂא, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁתְּהֵא שְׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהֶרֶת אֶת טְרֵפָתָהּ מִטֻּמְאָתָהּ. מַה מָּצִינוּ בִשְׁחִיטָתָהּ, שֶׁהִיא מַכְשַׁרְתָּהּ בַּאֲכִילָה, וּמְטַהֶרֶת אֶת טְרֵפָתָהּ מִטֻּמְאָתָהּ, אַף מְלִיקָתָהּ, שֶׁהִיא מַכְשַׁרְתָּהּ בַּאֲכִילָה, תְּטַהֵר אֶת טְרֵפָתָהּ מִטֻּמְאָתָהּ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, דַּיָּהּ כְּנִבְלַת בְּהֵמָה, שְׁחִיטָתָהּ מְטַהַרְתָּהּ, אֲבָל לֹא מְלִיקָתָהּ:

If one pierced [a bird's neck] and it was found to be a <i>Terefah</i> [an animal with a mortal condition such that it would die within one year], Rabbi Meir says: It does not render a person impure through swallowing. Rabbi Yehudah says: It does render a person impure through swallowing. Said Rabbi Meir: If the slaughtering of an animal [which if it were a] <i>Nevelah</i> [an improperly slaughtered animal of a permitted species] would transmit impurity via touch and carrying, [nevertheless] loses its ability to transmit impurity [if it were a] <i>Terefah</i>, then a bird [which if it were a] <i>Nevelah</i> would not transmit impurity through touch or carrying, should certainly [cause] a <i>Terefah</i>, if slaughtered, to lose its ability to transmit impurity. Just like we find that slaughtering [a bird] permits it to be eaten, and removes the ability of a <i>Terefah</i> to transmit impurity, so too piercing [a bird's neck] permits it to be eaten [should] remove the ability of a <i>Terefah</i> to transmit impurity. Rabbi Yose says: It is sufficient [to compare a <i>Terefah</i> bird] to a <i>neveilah</i> animal [such that] slaughtering removes its ability to transmit impurity, but piercing [its neck] does not.