What can we learn from the juxtaposition of Shechitah to Semichah?
Zevachim, 32a: It teaches us that just as the Semichah must be performed by someone who is Tahor (since a Tamei person may not enter the Azarah), so too, must the Shechitah be performed by someone who is Tahor. 1
Menachos, 93b: To teach us that the Shechitah must take place immediately 2 following the Semichah.
How do we know that Shechitah is performed on the neck?
Chulin, 27a: Because the acronym of the word "Veshachat" is 'mi'Makom she'Shach Chateihu' (On the location where it bends, cut it)!. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 47.
What are the connotations of the word "Veshachat"?
Chulin, (Ibid.): Which teaches us that if one severs the head in one go, the Shechitah is Pasul. See also Torah Temimah, note 49.
Chulin, (Ibid.): As in Yirmiyah, 9:6 "Chetz Shachut Leshonam".
Why does the Torah write "Veshachat es ben ha'Bakar" and not 'Veshachat oso"?
Chulin, 13a: To teach us that, when Shechting Kodshim, 1 one must have the intention to Shecht them ? to preclude 'Mis'asek' (where one had the intention to merely to pick up the knife or to throw it and one unintentionally Shechted the animal in the process) which is Pasul.
Zevachim, 32a: In order to Darshen "es ben ha'Bakar Lifnei Hashem", 've'Lo ha'Shochet Lifnei Hashem' ? that the Shochet is not obligated to stand before Hashem. 2
What are the connotaions of "Lifnei Hashem" regarding the Shechitah?
Rashi: It means 'in the Azarah'. 1
Oznayim la'Torah: It means 'tn the north of the Mizbe'ach'. 2
When must the Shechitah be performed?
Megilah 20b: Based on the Pasuk in Vayikra ?be?Yom Zivchachem Ye?achel?, it may be performed all day.
"Veshachat es ben ha'Bakar". What is the definition of ?ben ha?Bakar??
R. Bachye: A bull in its second year 1 ? as opposed to ?Eigel?, which is a calf in its first year and ?Par? in its third year. 2
Moshav Zekenim: "Ben ha'Bakar" precludes an old bull. Da'as Zekenim - also sick is excluded, due to "Hakrivehu Na l'Fechasecha".
Moshav Zekenim (3:7): "ben Bakar" is smaller than an Eigel; it still needs its mother, whereas "Par Ben Bakar" is a bull that is more than one year old.
?Veshachat es ben ha?Bakar?. Who performs the Shechitah?
Ramban: The owner brings the animal to the Beis-Hamikdash, Shechts it and performs Semichah on it.
R. Bachye: Either the owner or a Levi.
Targum Yonasan: The Shochet in the Beis-ha?Shechitah performed the Shechitah. 1
Neither opinion precludes the other.
?Veshachat es ben ha?Bakar?. The Avodos that follow ? ?Vehikrivu? and ?Vezarku? are written in the plural. Why is ?Veshachat written in the singular?
?Veshachat es ben ha?Bakar Lifnei Hashem?. What are the implications of " ? ben ha?Bakar Lifnei Hashem"?
Zevachim 32a:It implies that the bull must be standing in the Azarah but not the Shochet ? who may stand outside and Shecht with a long knife. 1
Though practically, it would be difficult to do so, seeing as the Azarah was sorounded by curtains.
Seeing as the Kabalas ha'Dam requires Kehunah, why does the Torah need to teach us that also the Holachah to the Mizbe?ach requires Kehunah?
Oznayim la'Torah: Because Holachah is dispensible ? seeing it is possible to perform the Kabalah immediately next to the Mizbe'ach.
What are the connotations of ?Vehikrivu B?nei Aharon ? "?
Rashi and Rashbam: It refers to Kabalas ha?Dam, which is the first Avodah after the Shechitah, and, based on the intrinsic meaning of the word, it refers to Holachah - taking the blood to the Mizbe?ach.
Ramban: It is a Lashon of Korban ? the Kohen renders the animal a Korban by receiving the blood in a bowl, as the Pasuk concludes and sprinkling it.
Kidushin 36a: ?Vehikrivu B?nei Aharon ? ", ?ve?Lo B?nos Aharon? ? This teaches us that Kabalas ha?Dam (and the Zerikah) 1 may only be performed by male Kohanim.
See Torah Temimah note 52.
Why does the Torah refer to the Kabalas ha?Dam as ?Vehikrivu??
Zevachim, 4a: To teach us that, like the Kabalas ha'Dam, the Holachah must be performed. Lish'mah. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 52.
Why does the Torah insert "ha'Kohanim" only after the word "Vehikrivu"?
Rashi: To teach us that the Mitzvah on the Kohanim begins with the Kabalas ha'Dam, and that consequently, a Zar is eligible to perform the Shechitah which precedes it.
Seeing as two witnesses did not necessaiily see the owner Shecht, how can the Kohen rely on the Kashrus of the Shechitah and eat from the Korban?
Rashi (in Chulin, 10b): This is the source of the principle 'Eid Echad Ne'eman be'Isurin' ('One winess is believed regarding Isurim'). 1
But not in other areas of Halachah. See Torah Temimah, note 43.
Since the Torah writes "B'nei Aharon", why does it need to add the word "ha'Kohanim"?
Rashi: To disqualify a Chalal (the son of a Kohen who married a P'sul Kehunah) 1 from performing the Avodah.
See Vayikra 21:7, 14.
Why does the Torah repeat the word "ha'Dam"?
Rashi (citing the Sifra): To incorporate two kinds of blood of the same Korban 1 that became mixed up, or even if it became mixed up with that of a different Korban. 2
Moshav Zekenim: Dam, which is Adom (red), should atone for someone who is red through Aveiros, and make him pleasing to Hashem, who is "Tzach ve'Adom" (Shir ha'Shirim 5:10), and He will exact payment from Edom (Eisav) in a red garment - "Madu'a Adom li'Levushecha" (Yeshayah 63:2).
Oznayim la'Torah: To stress that the main Kaparah of the Korban is the Zerikas ha'Dam, which is what the Pasuk is referring to when it writes in Acharei-Mos "va'Ani Nasativ lachem al ha'Mizbe'ach Lechaper", it is referring to the Zerikas ha'Dam.
Following the repetition of the word "ha'Dam, what do we learn from "es Damo" (in Pasuk 11)?
Rashi: We learn from the 'Vav' at the end of the word that if it became mixed up with the blood of a Pasul Korban or with the blood of Chata'os ha'Penimiyos 1 or of Chata'os Chitzoniyos, it cannot be sprinkled, since Dam Chatas Chitzonos is sprinkled above (on the top half of the Mizbe'ach), whereas Dam Olah is sprinkled below. 2
Ba'al ha'Turim (citing Bereishis Rabah 84:19) and Moshav Zekenim (on Pasuk 3:1): Human blood resembles that of sheep 3 (refer to Bereishis 37:31:1:1), so the Torah writes "Damo", as if he offered his own blood.
What are the implications of "ve'Zarku" mentioned with regard to the majority of Korbanos (as opposed to "ve'Hizah" mentioned in connection with the Chatas (See for example, 4:6)?
Rashi: Regarding the former, the Kohen stands on the floor, dips his finger into the bowl of blood and sprinkles it below the Chut ha'Sikra, 1 whereas regarding the latter, he ascends the Mizbe'ach on to the Soveiv and and throws the blood directly from the bowl on to the K'ranos.
The red thread that divided between the upper and the lower halves of the Mizbe'ach ? in the Beis-Hamikdash..
What are the implications of the word "Saviv"?
Rashi: He throws the blood from the bowl on to the two diametrically-opposite corners of the Mizbe'ach 1 - so that some blood lands on each of the four sides. 2
On the north-east and on the south-western corners - which both had a Y'sod - whereas the south eastern corner did not.
Rashi: "Saviv" cannot be taken literally, since it says "ve'Zarku", and it is impossible to surround the Mizbe'ach with the amount of blood in the bowl. See Torah Temimah citing Eruvin 57a, who learns this from ? ? al ha?Mizbe?ach Saviv?. See Torah Temimah note 57.
Why does the Torah insert the word "Saviv" in between "al ha'Mizbe'ach" and "asher Pesach Ohel Mo'ed"?
Oznayim la'Torah: It is in order to do this ? like we find in Lech-L'cha, Bereishis, 14:12 "Vayikchu es Lot ve'es Rechisho, ben Achi Avram". 1
Oznayim la'Torah: Moreover, to have inserted it after "asher Pesach Ohel Mo'ed" would imply that the Mizbe'ach surrounded the Ohel Mo'ed.
?Vezarku es ha?Dam?. Why does the Torah repeat ?es h?Dam??
Sifra: To teach us that if the blood got mixed-up with blood from another Korban of the same kind, the Kohen is obligated to sprinkle it.
Why does the Torah add the (otherwise superfluus) words "asher Pesach Ohel Mo'ed"?
Rashi: To teach us that the Z'rikas ha'Dam could only be performed when the Ohel Mo'ed was standing; but not when it was dismantled.
Rashbam: It comes to preclude the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav which stood inside the Ohel Mo'ed.
Zevachim, 119b: To preclude the Din of "Saviv" from a Bamah ? which was not subject to "Pesach Ohel Mo'ed".
Why does the Torah repeat "Lifnei Hashem" regarding a bull?
Refer to 1:3:154:1.
Why does the Torah refer to a bull as "Ben ha'Bakar"?
Moshav Zekenim: "Ben ha'Baka"r excludes an old bull. Da'as Zekenim - also sick is excluded, due to "Hakrivehu Na l'Fechasecha."
Moshav Zekenim (3:7): "Ben Bakar" is smaller than an Eigel; it still needs its mother, 1 whereas "Par Ben Bakar" is a bull that is above one year.
R. Bechayei (citing R. Meir in Rosh Hashanah 10a): "Ben Bakar" is in its second year, and 2 "Par Ben Bakar", in its third year, whereas "Eigel" is a yearling.
One may bring even an adult bull for an Olah or Shelamim! Why does it say Ben ha'Bakar? (PF)
Ba'al ha'Turim: Ben Bakar is Ben Shanah (i.e. during the first year, like "Keves Ben Shanah" - PF); the Gematriya is 354 (the number of days in a lunar year). Refer also to 1:5:152:2*.
Why does he Torah refer to the Kohanim as "B'nei Aharon"?
Moshav Zekenim #1 and Da'as Zekenim: In order to disqualify an old 1 Kohen from performing the Avodah.
Moshav Zekenim #2: Due to the sin of the Eigel, Aharon is not mentioned in the curent Parshah of Korbanos. And when he Davened and asked for mercy, Hashem responded and the next Parshah begins "Tzav es Aharon."
Riva: Aharon is mentioned nine times regarding Chet ha'Eigel (Sh'mos Perek 32). Corresponding to this, he is not mentioned in the first nine Avodos of Mitzvah; and the Pasuk writes "Bnei Aharon." 2
Why is "Veshachat" in the singular, and "ve'Hikrivu" ? "Vezarku" and "Ve'archu" in the plural?
Da'as Zekenim: Because normally one person does Shechitah, but many Kohanim perform the other Avodos.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that "ha'Kohanim" is written after "ve'Hikrivu", to teach us that from Kabalah and onwards requires a Kohen. But the Gemara in B'rachos, 31b states that a Zar may do the Shechitah, and does not cite the current Pasuk?
Rashi writes that if the Dam Olah became mixed with the Dam Chatas Chitzonis, it cannot be sprinkled, since the latter is sprinkled above, and the former, below. But both opinions in Zevachim 8:10 permit sprinkling it?
Riva: Rashi follows the opinion of the Chachamim in Zevachim 8:9, who say that the entire mixture is poured on to the Amah. Mishnah 8:10 does not discuss Chatas, rather, Korbanos that require two Zerikos [on opposite corners] that are like four.
Moshav Zekenim: Even if the blood of an Olah became mixed with the blood of a B'chor, Ma'aser or Pesach, which requires only one Zerikah, or with Chatas Chitzonis, it is sprinkled, since in all cases, one is Yotzei with one Zerikah. 1
This is unlike Rashi.
