Lo, all agree that when the log comes separately, (1) its sprinklings permit it, and yet they do not render it Piggul. For it was taught, A leper's log of oil involves liability on account of Piggul, because the blood permits it for [sprinkling on] the thumbs: that is R. Meir's view. Said they to R. Meir: But a man can bring his guilt-offering now, and his log even ten days later! I too, he answered them, ruled [thus] only when it comes with the guilt-offering! — Rather said R. Jeremiah: In truth it agrees with R. Meir, but delete ‘drink-offerings’ from this passage. Abaye said: After all, you need not delete [it]. But he [first] teaches about the log which comes with the guiltoffering, (2) and the same applies to the drinkoffering which comes with the sacrifice. And then he teaches about the drink-offering which comes separately, (3) and the same applies to the log which comes separately. THE BLOOD OF THE BIRD SINOFFERING PERMITS ITS FLESH TO THE PRIESTS. Whence do we know it? (4) — For Levi taught: [This shall be thine — the priest's... ] every offering of theirs: (5) that is to include a leper's log of oil. I might think that the Divine Law wrote, reserved from the fire, (6) whereas this is not reserved from the fire; (7) therefore it informs us [that it is not so]. Even every meal-offering of theirs (8) includes the meal-offering of the ‘omer (9) and the mealoffering of jealousy. (10) I might think [that it is written,] And they shall eat these things wherewith atonement was made, (11) [whereas] the meal-offering of the ‘omer comes to permit [the new corn], while the mealoffering of jealousy comes to establish guilt; therefore [the text] informs us [that it is not so]. And every sin-offering of theirs (12) includes the sin-offering of a bird. I might think that it is nebelah; (13) therefore [the text] informs us [that it is not so]. And every guiltoffering of theirs (12) includes a Nazirite's guiltoffering and a leper's guilt-offering. I might think that these come to qualify [them]; (14) therefore [the text] informs us [that it is not so]. But it is explicitly written that a leper's guilt-offering [is eaten]? (15) Rather it is to include a Nazirite's guilt-offering [teaching that it is like] a leper's guilt-offering. Which they may render (16) includes what is taken by robbery from a proselyte. (17) Shall be for thee: (16) it shall be thine even for betrothing a woman. (18) It was taught, R. Eleazar said on the authority of R. Jose the Galilean: (19) If [the priest] declared a Piggul intention in respect of a rite which is performed without, (20) he renders it Piggul; in respect of a rite which is performed within, (21) he does not render it Piggul. How so? If he stood without and declared, ‘Lo, I slaughter [this sacrifice intending] to sprinkle its blood to-morrow,’ he does not render it Piggul because it is an intention [expressed] without concerning a rite which is performed within. (22) If he stood within and declared, ‘Lo, I sprinkle [the blood], intending to burn the emurim and pour out the residue (23) to-morrow,’ he does not render it Piggul, because it is an intention [expressed] within concerning a rite which is performed without. If he stood without and declared, ‘Lo, I slaughter [this sacrifice intending] to pour out the residue to-morrow , or ‘to burn the emurim to-morrow,’ he renders it Piggul, because it is an intention [expressed] without concerning a rite which is performed without. R. Joshua b. Levi said: Which text [teaches this]? As is taken from the ox of the sacrifice of peace-offerings. (24) What then do we learn from the ox of the sacrifice of peaceofferings? (25) [Scripture] however likens the anointed priest's bullock to the ox of the sacrifice of peace-offerings: as the ox of the sacrifice of peace-offerings [does not become Piggul] unless its rites and its intentions are [done] on the outer altar, (26) so the anointed priest's bullock [does not become Piggul] unless its intentions and its rites are [done] in connection with the outer altar. R. Nahman said in Rabbah b. Abbuha's name in Rab's name: The halachah is as R. Eleazar's ruling in the name of R. Jose. Said Raba:

---

(1). ↑ I.e., when the leper brings it some days after his guilt-offering.
(2). ↑ That the blood of the guilt-offering can render it Piggul, though he could have brought the log later.
(3). ↑ That this cannot become Piggul.
(4). ↑ That its flesh may be eaten.
(5). ↑ Num. XVIII, 9.
(6). ↑ Ibid.
(7). ↑ No portion of it was burnt at all.
(8). ↑ Ibid.
(9). ↑ V. Glos., and Lev. XXIII, 10-14.
(10). ↑ V. Num. V, 12-15.
(11). ↑ Ex. XXIX, 33.
(12). ↑ Num. XVIII, 9.
(13). ↑ V. Glos. The bird-offering was killed by wringing its neck (Lev. I, 14-15), whereas ordinary shechitah (ritual killing) consists of cutting the windpipe and the gullet. — Nebelah of course may not be eaten.
(14). ↑ A Nazirite's guilt-offering qualifies him to recommence his Naziriteship after becoming unclean, while a leper's guilt-offering qualifies him to partake of holy food (v. Num. VI, 9-12, Lev. XIV, where the whole ceremony of purification is described). Thus they do not come to make atonement.
(15). ↑ Lev. XIV, 13: for as the sin-offering is the priest's, so is the guilt-offering.
(16). ↑ Num. XVIII, 9.
(17). ↑ If a man robs a proselyte, commits perjury in denying it, and then confesses, he must return what he robbed to the proselyte, plus a fifth, and also bring a guilt-offering. But if the proselyte died in the meantime and left no heirs, the principal and the fifth belong to the Priest (v. B.K. 110a), and this is taught by the present exegesis.
(18). ↑ Which was done with money or its value. — This last refers only to the robbery of a proselyte.
(19). ↑ Sh. M. deletes ‘the Galilean’.
(20). ↑ I.e., in the Temple court.
(21). ↑ In the Hekal.
(22). ↑ This passage deals with the bullocks and hegoats which were burnt, about which there is a controversy in the Mishnah. Their blood was sprinkled on the inner altar in the Hekal.
(23). ↑ Both were done at the outer altar.
(24). ↑ Lev. IV, 10. This refers to the anointed priest's bullock, which was burnt. After describing its rites, including the removal of the fat, Scripture proceeds, (This shall be) as (the fat which) is taken, etc.
(25). ↑ The rites of removing the fat, etc. are exactly described: what then does Scripture teach?
(26). ↑ I.e., unless the intention to perform its rites or to eat the flesh after time is expressed in connection with and during the performance of a rite on the outer altar-since all its rites were on the outer altar.