## Sifrei Devarim Paragraph 71

###### Sifrei Devarim 71:1
[Sifrei Devarim 71:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:1)

(דברים יב טו) **רַק בְּכָל אַוַּת נַפְשְׁךָ תִּזְבַּח וְאָכַלְתָּ**, בַּמֶּה הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר? אִם בִּבְשַׂר תַּאֲוָה – כְּבָר אָמוּר, וְאִם בַּאֲכִילַת קָדָשִׁים – כְּבָר אָמוּר. הָא אֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר אֶלָּא בִּפְסוּלֵי הַמֻּקְדָּשִׁים שֶׁיִּפָּדוּ. יָכוֹל יִפָּדוּ עַל מוּם עוֹבֵר? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **רַק**.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
**Pisqa’ 71**⁷⁵
1. “*However*, at your *heart’s desire,* shall you *slaughter* (*tizbakh*) and eat *mea*t” (Dt. 12:15).
What is the verse discussing?
If you claim [that this verse permits]
eating meat *whenever you desire it*,
this is already granted elsewhere (Dt. 12:20)!
But if you claim [that this verse permits commoners]
to eat consecrated animals,
this too is already granted elsewhere (Dt. 12:11)!
Look—the verse specifically addresses
**disqualified consecrated animals**
**which may be redeemed for use as common meat.**
**Is it possible to say that**
**they may be redeemed for common meat**
**on account of a transient blemish?**⁷⁶
The Teaching states:
“*However*” (Dt. 12:15)—
[this restrictive clause limits the rule to a permanent blemish!]

footnotes:
⁷⁵ H:123-125;JN1:205-207
⁷⁶ Cf. M.Bekh.2:2; T.Bekh.2:3


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:2
[Sifrei Devarim 71:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:2)

**תִּזְבַּח וְאָכַלְתָּ** וְלֹא גִזָּה.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
2. “Shall you *slaughter* and *eat*” (Dt. 12:15)—
but *not* shear its wool!


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:3
[Sifrei Devarim 71:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:3)

**בָּשָׂר** וְלֹא חָלָב.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
“*Meat*” (Dt. 12:15)—
but not milk!


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:4
[Sifrei Devarim 71:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:4)

יָכוֹל יְהוּ אֲסוּרִים לְאַחַר זְבִיחָה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **כְּבִרְכַּת ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לְךָ**,

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
Is it possible to say that
[a consecrated animal’s wool or milk]
is prohibited even after its slaughter (*zevikhah*)?
The Teaching states:
“According to the blessing of HASHEM your God which He has *bestowed* upon you” (Dt. 12:15)—
[that is, this prohibition applies only prior to the killing].


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:5
[Sifrei Devarim 71:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:5)

יָכוֹל אִם קָדַם מוּם קָבוּעַ לְהֶקְדֵּשָׁם וְנִפְדּוּ, יְהוּ אֲסוּרִים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (דברים יב כו): **רַק**.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
Is it possible to say that
**if a permanent blemish *preceded* the consecration,**
**and thereafter the animals were redeemed—**
**they are prohibited [for use as common meat]?**⁷⁷
The Teaching states:
“*However*” (Dt. 12:15)—
[this restrictive clause limits the rule to a permanent blemish]!

footnotes:
⁷⁷ Cf, M. Bekh.2:2.


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:6
[Sifrei Devarim 71:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:6)

מִנַּיִן שֶׁאֵין נִשְׁחָטִים אֶלָּא עַל מוּם קָבוּעַ? אָמַרְתָּ, קַל וָחֹמֶר הוּא: וּמָה בְּכוֹר, שֶׁאֵין נוֹהֵג בְּכָל הַוְּלָדוֹת, וְיוֹצֵא לְחֻלִּין שֶׁלֹּא בְפִדְיוֹן – אֵין נִשְׁחָט אֶלָּא עַל מוּם קָבוּעַ, קָדָשִׁים, שֶׁהֵם נוֹהֲגִים בְּכָל הַוְּלָדוֹת, וְאֵין יוֹצְאִים לְחֻלִּין אֶלָּא בְּפִדְיוֹן – אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ נִשְׁחָטִים אֶלָּא עַל מוּם קָבוּעַ? לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִּבְכוֹר, שֶׁכֵּן קְדֻשָּׁתוֹ מֵרֶחֶם, וּקְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עָלָיו עַל בַּעַל מוּם קָבוּעַ, תֹּאמַר בְּקָדָשִׁים, שֶׁאֵין קְדֻשָּׁתָם מֵרֶחֶם, וְאֵין קְדֻשָּׁה חָלָה עֲלֵיהֶם עַל בַּעַל מוּם קָבוּעַ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לְךָ בְּכָל שְׁעָרֶיךָ**, שְׁעָרֶיךָ שְׁעָרֶיךָ לִגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה: מַה (דברים טו כב) ״שְׁעָרֶיךָ״ הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן, אֵין נִשְׁחָט אֶלָּא עַל מוּם קָבוּעַ, אַף **שְׁעָרֶיךָ** הָאָמוּר כָּאן אֵין נִשְׁחָט אֶלָּא עַל מוּם קָבוּעַ.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
On what basis do we know that
consecrated animals are only killed (*nishkhatim*)
[for common meat]
on account of a permanent blemish?
You can frame this deductively:
**Just as a Firstling,**
**whose first-born**
**status is not shared with other siblings,**
**and which may be treated as common meat**
**without prior redemption,**
**may be killed for common meat**
**only on account of a permanent blemish—**
**isn’t it only logical that**
**consecrated animals,**
**whose consecrated status**
**may be shared with other siblings,**
**yet which can be treated as common meat**
**only upon redemption—**
**may be slaughtered for common meat**
**only on account of a permanent blemish?**
**No!**
**If you assert this of a Firstling,**
**whose consecration takes place in the womb,**
**and whose consecration is retained**
**even despite a permanent blemish,**
**would you assert the same of consecrated animals,**
**whose consecration does not take place in the womb,**
**and whose consecration is not retained**
**after a permanent blemish?**
**The Teaching states:**
**“Which He has bestowed upon you in *all your gates*” (Dt. 12:15).**
***In all your gates* [appears here],**
**and in *all your gates* [appears elsewhere (Dt:15:22)].**
**[These identical phrases] permit an analogical inference:**
**Just as *in all your gates*, which appears elsewhere (Dt. 15:22),**
**specifies that the Firstling is slaughtered for common meat**
**only on account of a permanent blemish,**
**so, too, *in all your gates*, which appears here (Dt. 12:15)**
**specifies that the consecrated animal**
**is slaughtered for common meat**
**only on account of a permanent blemish**!⁷⁸ 124.2.

footnotes:
⁷⁸ See also Pisqa’


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:7
[Sifrei Devarim 71:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:7)

טָמֵא יֹאכַל, אֵין לִי אֶלָּא טָמֵא, טָהוֹר מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (דברים יב כב): ״יַחְדָּו יֹאכְלֶנּוּ״, מַגִּיד שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם אוֹכְלִים מִתּוֹךְ קְעָרָה אַחַת.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
3. “The *unclean* and the *clean* shall eat of it” (Dt. 12:15).
I might infer only that
the *unclean* diners
[shall eat in isolation from the clean].
How do we know to include the clean
[and the unclean together]?
The Teaching states:
“The unclean and the clean *together* shall eat of it” (Dt. 15:22; cf. Dt. 12:22)—
this indicates that
both of them eat [unconsecrated food] from a single plate.


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:8
[Sifrei Devarim 71:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:8)

יָכוֹל אַף תְּרוּמָה נֶאֱכֶלֶת מִתּוֹךְ קְעָרָה אַחַת? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **יַחְדָּו יֹאכְלֶנּוּ**, זֶה נֶאֱכָל מִתּוֹךְ קְעָרָה אַחַת, וְאֵין תְּרוּמָה נֶאֱכֶלֶת מִתּוֹךְ קְעָרָה אַחַת.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
Is it possible to say that
even Threshing-floor-offering is eaten
[with unconsecrated food] from a single plate?
The Teaching states:
“*Together* they shall eat of it” (Dt. 15:22)—
This [Firstling] may be eaten
from a single plate with other offerings,
but Threshing-floor-offering is not eaten
from a single plate [containing other offerings].


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:9
[Sifrei Devarim 71:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:9)

יָכוֹל יְהוּ חַיָּבִים בַּמַּתָּנוֹת? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **כַּצְּבִי**.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
[“*Like* the gazelle and the deer”] (Dt. 12:15)]⁷⁹
Is it possible to say that
[wild animals] are under obligation for the priestly Gifts
[of the shoulder, cheeks, and stomach (Dt. 18:3-4)]?
The Teaching states:
“*Like* the gazelle” (Dt. 12:15)—

footnotes:
⁷⁹ I have supplied the bracketed verse.


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:10
[Sifrei Devarim 71:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:10)

אוֹצִיאוֹ מִכְּלַל מַתָּנוֹת וְלֹא אוֹצִיאוֹ מִכְּלַל חָזֶה וְשׁוֹק! תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **וְכָאַיָּל**.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
shall I exclude [the gazelle] from the class
of animals under obligation for the Priestly Gifts,
but not exclude it from the class
[e.g., of Communion-offerings]
under obligation for the breast and the foreleg (Lv. 7:31-32)?⁸⁰
The Teaching states:
“*And* the deer*”* (Dt. 12:15)—
[this expansive clause indicates that
both the gazelle and deer fall under the same rule].

footnotes:
⁸⁰ See M. Hul.10:1 regarding the relation of the priestly Gift to the breast and fore-leg.


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:11
[Sifrei Devarim 71:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:11)

אוֹ מָה הַצְּבִי כֻּלּוֹ מֻתָּר, יָכוֹל אַף זֶה כֻּלּוֹ מֻתָּר? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **רַק**.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
Or [is it possible to argue as follows]?
Just as the gazelle is entirely permitted [with its suet],
so, too, this deer is entirely permitted [with its suet]?
The Teaching states:
“*However*” (Dt. 12:15)—
[the restrictive clause prohibits the suet of wild animals for consumption].


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:12
[Sifrei Devarim 71:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:12)

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: יָכוֹל כְּשֵׁם שֶׁנָּתְנָה תּוֹרָה מְחִצָּה בֵּין קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים לְקָדָשִׁים קַלִּים בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵם תְּמִימִים, כָּךְ נָתְנָה תּוֹרָה מְחִצָּה בֵּין קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים לְקָדָשִׁים קַלִּים בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵם בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **כַּצְּבִי וְכָאַיָּל**, מַגִּיד הַכָּתוּב שֶׁכְּשֵׁם שֶׁלֹּא נָתְנָה תּוֹרָה מְחִצָּה בֵּין צְבִי וְאַיָּל, כָּךְ לֹא נָתְנָה תּוֹרָה מְחִצָּה בֵּין קָדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים לְקָדָשִׁים קַלִּים בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵם בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִים.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
4. R. Shimon says:
is it possible to say that
just as the Torah requires a partition separating
Most-Holy-offerings⁸¹ E.g., Holocaust-offerings and Purification-offerings. from Lesser-Holy-offerings⁸² E.g., Communion-offerings and Tithes.
when they are both unblemished,
so, too, the Torah requires a partition separating
Most-Holy-offerings from Lesser-Holy-offerings
when each is blemished?
The Teaching states:
“*Like* the gazelle and the deer” (Dt. 12:15).
The verse specifies that
just as the Torah requires no partition separating
the gazelle and the deer,
so, too, the Torah requires no partition
separating Most-Holy offerings and Lesser-Holy offerings
when each is blemished.

footnotes:
⁸¹ Heb: qodshei qodashim.
⁸² Heb: qodashim qalim.


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:13
[Sifrei Devarim 71:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:13)

(דברים יב טז) **רַק הַדָּם לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ**, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: יָכוֹל יִהְיוּ חַיָּבִים עַל דָּמָם שְׁנֵי לָאוִין, כְּדַם מֻקְדָּשִׁים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **רַק הַדָּם לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ**, לָאו אֶחָד יֵשׁ בּוֹ וְאֵין בּוֹ שְׁנֵי לָאוִין.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
5. “*However*—the *blood* shall you *not eat*” (Dt. 12:16).
**Rabbi Judah says**:
**is it possible to say that**
**we are held liable for [violating] two proscriptions,**
**as in the consumption of the blood**
**of consecrated animals?**
**The Teaching states:**
**“*However*—the blood shall you *not eat*” (Dt. 12:16)—**
**[the restrictive clause implies that]**
**there is one proscription regarding this blood,**
**but not two proscriptions.**⁸³ per.20:7

footnotes:
⁸³ Sifra, nedavah,


###### Sifrei Devarim 71:14
[Sifrei Devarim 71:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/71:14)

**עַל הָאָרֶץ תִּשְׁפְּכֶנּוּ**, וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ יַמִּים וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ נְהָרוֹת וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ כֵּלִים. **כַּמָּיִם** וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ מַיִם עַצְמָם, **כַּמָּיִם** – מַה מַּיִם מֻתָּרִים בַּהֲנָיָה אַף דָּם מֻתָּר בַּהֲנָיָה, מַה מַּיִם מַכְשִׁירִים אֶת הַזְּרָעִים אַף דָּם מַכְשִׁיר אֶת הַזְּרָעִים, מַה מַּיִם פְּטוּרִים מִלְּכַסּוֹת אַף דָּם פָּטוּר מִלְּכַסּוֹת.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
**“On the ground you shall spill it” (Dt. 12:16)—**
**not into the seas, and not into the rivers,**
**and not into containers.**⁸⁴
“*Like* water” (Dt. 12:16)—
and not into the waters themselves.
“*Like* water” (Dt. 12:16)—
just as water is permitted for benefit,
so, too, blood is permitted for benefit.
**Just as water prepares seeds**
**to receive uncleanness,**
**so, to, blood prepares seeds**
**to receive uncleanness.**⁸⁵
Just as water is exempt from being covered
with earth when spilled,
so, too, blood [of a wild animal] is exempt from being covered
with earth when spilled.

footnotes:
⁸⁴ Cf. M. Hul.2:9; // T.Hul.2:19.
⁸⁵ Cf. M. Makh.6:4.