Why does the Torah insert the (otherwise superfluous) phrase "ve'el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed Lo Hevi'o"?
Zevachim, 115a: To teach us that a Korban that is not fit to be brought to the entrance of the Ohel Mo'ed (to go on the Mizbe'ach) is not subject to Shechutei Chutz. 1
Such as a Mechusar Z'man (before it is eight days old). See Torah Temimah, note 9, for more examples.
Why does the Torah insert the (otherwise superfluous) word "ve'el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed Lo Hevi''o"
Zevachim, 107b: To preclude the roof of the Ohe Mo'ed from the Din of Shechutei Chutz - If the Kohen Shechts the animal on the roof of the Heichal, he is Patur. 1
Zevachim, 113b: To preclude Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis from the Chiyuv of Shechutei Chutz - even though they are called 'Korban'.
See Torah Temimah, note 10.
Why does the Torah write here "Lo Hevi'o" (past) and not 'Lo Yevi'enu' (future) like it does by Ha'ala'ah - in Pasuk 8?
Oznayim la'Torah (in Pasuk 8): Because, according to the Chachamim, one is Chayav for Ha'ala'as Chutz, even if the animal was Shechted outside the Azarah, in which case it it no longer eligible to be brought inside - and he is immediately Chayav for not having brought it on the Mizbe'ach.
What are the implications of "Le'hakriv Korban la'Hashem"?
Kidushin, 57b: It implies that one is only Chayav Kareis for Shechting Kodshim ba'Chutz, but not for Shechting Chulin in the Azarah - which is forbidden. 1
Zevachim, 113b: It implies that the Sa'ir la'Azazel - even though it is fit to be brought to the entrance of the Ohel Mo'ed 2 - is not subject to Shechutei Chutz,, seeing as it does not fall under the category of 'Korban la'Hashem'.
Why does the Torah insert the (otherwise superfluous) words "Lifnei Mishkan Hashem"?
Zevachim, 113b: To preclude Rove'a, Nirva, Muktzah, Ne'evad, M'chir (Kelv), Esnan (Zonah), KIl'ayim, T'reifah and Yotzei Dofen from the Chiyuv of Shechutei Chutz - even if the P'sul occurred after they were declared Hekdesh. 1
Oznayim la'Torah: To teach us that, even though he brought the Korban to Hashem, he sinned bye failing to bring it to the Mishkan, which is the location of the Shechinah. 2
What are the implications of "Dam Yechashev la'Ish ha'Hu ... "?
Rashi, Ramban, Seforno 1 and Targum Yonasan: It implies that Shechting an animal (or a Korban) outside the Azarah is considered an act of murder. 2
Rashbam: He is Chayav Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim - for that blood which he spilt when he Shechted the Korban outside the Azarah. 3
Zevachim, 107a: "Dam Yechashev" comes to incorporate Shechting a bird in the Din of Shechutei Chutz. 4
Zevachim, 102b: "Dam Yechashev la'Ish" implies that it is considered Shechutei Chutz even if he Shechts it on behalf of person.
Under the current circumstances - even though, after the flood, the blood of animals was permitted like water and their flesh was Hefker like dung (as the Pasuk states in Bereishis (9:3 [Ramban]). See also Oznaayim la'Torah.
The Ramban in Pasuk 2 states that there was Kareis even for Shechitas Chulin ba'Chutz. Moshav Zekenim (in Pasuk #3): What is his source for Kareis? R. Yishmael extrapolates from "Ki Yarchiv" - Re'ei Devarim, 12:20 - that Basar Ta'avah was forbidden in the desert but this is not a source for Kareis? The Ramban explicitly states that Pasuk #2 is referring to someone in the desert who Shechted asar Ta'avah outside the Azarah.
See Torah Temimah, note 15.
What are the implications of the words "Dam Yechashev la'Ish ha'Hu"?
Kidushin, 43a: It implies that if one appoints a Shali'ach to Shecht the animal ba'Chutz, in which case he is not Chayav, only the Shali'ach - due to the principle "Ein Shali'ach li'Devar Aveirah. 1
Zevachim, 108a: It implies that if two people Shecht the animal together, they are Patur. 2
Why does the Torah add the words "Dam Shafach"?
Rashi: To include sprinkling the blood of the Korban in the prohibition. 1
Rashbam: Refer to 17:4:1:2.
Targum Yonasan: It is considered as if he spilled innocent blood.
Oznayim la'Torah: It refers to his own Nefesh ha'Chayim, the "Nefesh Chayah", incorporating the power of speech that renders man superior to animals, 2 which he kills when he abuses it. Consequently, having verbally designated an animal as a Korban to be brought in the Azarah, if he subsequently brings it outside the Azarah, it is considered Shefichus Damim. 3
The Gemara in Zevachim, 107b leqrns it from "O Zevach" in Pasuk 8. See Torah Temimah, note 35.
Refer to Bereishis, 2:7:4:2.
Why does the Torah insert the (otherwise superfluous) words "Ve'nichras ha'Ish ha'Hu"?
Sifra: "ha'Ish", 've'Lo Tzibur' - because the Tzibur is not subject to Kareis. 1
Zevachim, 108b: "Hu", 've'Lo Oneis' ? 've'Lo Shogeg' ? 've'Lo Mut'eh'. 2
What are the implications of the (otherwise superfluous) words "Venichras ha'Ish ha'Hu mi'Kerev Amo"?
