Get the best of content every week!
Find answers to fascinating Jewish questions, enjoy holiday tips and guides, read real-life stories and more!

Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

Maaseh Hakorbanot - Chapter 18

Show content in:

Maaseh Hakorbanot - Chapter 18


There is a positive commandment to offer all of the sacrifices - whether sacrifices of animals or fowl or meal-offerings - in [God's] chosen house,1 as [Deuteronomy 12:14] states: "There you will perform everything that I command you." Similarly, it is a positive commandment for a person to take the effort to bring animal sacrifices2 that he is obligated to bring3 [and transport them] from the Diaspora to [God's] chosen house,4 as [ibid.:26] states: "[Only] your sacraments that you possess and your vows shall you bear... [to the place that God will choose]." According to the Oral Tradition, we have learned that [the verse] is speaking only about sacrificial animals from the Diaspora which he takes the effort to deal with until he brings them to [God's] chosen house.


כָּל הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת כֻּלָּן בֵּין קָרְבְּנוֹת בְּהֵמָה וְעוֹף בֵּין קָרְבְּנוֹת מְנָחוֹת מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה לְהַקְרִיבָן בְּבֵית הַבְּחִירָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב יד) "וְשָׁם תַּעֲשֶׂה כּל אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּךָּ". וְכֵן מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה לִהְיוֹת כָּל אָדָם מְטַפֵּל וּמֵבִיא קָרְבְּנוֹת בְּהֵמָה שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּב לְהַקְרִיבָן מִחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ לְבֵית הַבְּחִירָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב כו) "קָדָשֶׁיךָ אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ לְךָ וּנְדָרֶיךָ תִּשָּׂא" וְגוֹ'. מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר אֶלָּא בְּקָדְשֵׁי חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ שֶׁהוּא מְטַפֵּל בָּהֶם עַד שֶׁיְּבִיאֵם לְבֵית הַבְּחִירָה:


One who offers a sacrifice outside the Temple Courtyard negates a positive commandment5 and violates a negative commandment,6 as [ibid. :13] states: "Take heed lest you offer your burnt-offerings in any place that you see." If he offered a sacrifice [in such a place] willfully, he is liable for karet,7 as [Leviticus 17:8-9] states: "[Any man]...who will offer a burnt-offering or a sacrifice, but did not bring it to the Tent of Meeting... he will be cut off from his people." [If he transgressed] unknowingly, he must bring a fixed8 sin-offering.


הַמַּקְרִיב קָרְבָּן חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה בִּטֵּל מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה וְעָבַר עַל לֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב יג) "הִשָּׁמֶר לְךָ פֶּן תַּעֲלֶה עלֹתֶיךָ בְּכָל מָקוֹם אֲשֶׁר תִּרְאֶה". וְאִם הִקְרִיב בְּמֵזִיד חַיָּב כָּרֵת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז ח) "אֲשֶׁר יַעֲלֶה עלָה אוֹ זָבַח" (ויקרא יז ט) "וְאֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֹא הֱבִיאוֹ" "וְנִכְרַת מֵעַמָּיו". בְּשׁוֹגֵג מֵבִיא חַטָּאת קְבוּעָה:


Similarly, one who slaughters sacrificial animals outside [the Temple Courtyard], even though he does not offer them as a sacrifice, [is liable].9 If he acted willfully, he is liable for karet, as [ibid:3-4]: "[Any man]...who will slaughter an ox, a sheep, or a goat... it will be considered as [the shedding of] blood for that person. He has shed blood... He will be cut off." [If he transgressed] unknowingly, he must bring a fixed sin-offering.


וְכֵן הַשּׁוֹחֵט קָדָשִׁים חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הֶעֱלָם אִם הָיָה מֵזִיד חַיָּב כָּרֵת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז ג) "אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁחַט שׁוֹר אוֹ כֶשֶׂב אוֹ עֵז" וְגוֹ' (ויקרא יז ד) "דָּם יֵחָשֵׁב לָאִישׁ הַהוּא דָּם שָׁפָךְ וְנִכְרַת". וְאִם שָׁחַט בְּשׁוֹגֵג מֵבִיא חַטָּאת קְבוּעָה:


Which source serves as a warning not to sacrifice outside [the Temple Courtyard]? [It is derived through] an association of verses. [Deuteronomy 12:14] states: "There will you offer your burnt-offerings" and it continues: "There you will perform everything that I command you." [We can conclude:] Just as [the Torah] warns explicitly against offering a sacrifice outside the Temple, and one incurs punishment for this, as it is written: "Take heed lest you offer your burnt-offerings...," so too, it has warned with regard to the "performance" that is involved in slaughtering, for which it is explicitly stated that one receives punishment. For the Torah does not prescribe punishment unless it has issued a warning.


וְהֵיכָן הִזְהִיר עַל הַשְּׁחִיטָה בַּחוּץ. בְּהֶקֵּשׁ. נֶאֱמַר (דברים יב יד) "שָׁם תַּעֲלֶה עלֹתֶיךָ" וְנֶאֱמַר (דברים יב יד) "וְשָׁם תַּעֲשֶׂה כּל אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּךָּ". מָה הָעֲלִיָּה בַּחוּץ שֶׁעָנַשׁ עָלֶיהָ הִזְהִיר עָלֶיהָ בְּפֵרוּשׁ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יב יג) "הִשָּׁמֶר לְךָ פֶּן תַּעֲלֶה עלֹתֶיךָ". אַף עֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבִּכְלַל הַשְּׁחִיטָה שֶׁעָנַשׁ עָלֶיהָ בְּפֵרוּשׁ הֲרֵי הוּא מֻזְהָר עָלֶיהָ. שֶׁלֹּא עָנַשׁ הַכָּתוּב אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִזְהִיר:


A person who slaughters sacrificial animals outside [the Temple Courtyard] and offers them [in such a place] is liable twice: once for slaughtering and once for offering.10

If he slaughtered [a sacrificial animal] in the Temple Courtyard and offered it outside, he is liable for offering it. If he slaughtered [such an animal] outside, but offered it inside, he is liable for slaughtering it.


הַשּׁוֹחֵט קָדָשִׁים וְהֶעֱלָם בַּחוּץ חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם. אַחַת עַל הַשְּׁחִיטָה וְאַחַת עַל הָעֲלִיָּה. שָׁחַט בִּפְנִים וְהֶעֱלָה בַּחוּץ חַיָּב עַל הָעֲלִיָּה. וְכֵן אִם שָׁחַט בַּחוּץ וְהֶעֱלָה בִּפְנִים חַיָּב עַל הַשְּׁחִיטָה:


He is not liable unless he slaughtered sacrificial animals that are fit to be offered on the altar. If, however, he slaughtered an animal that was forbidden [to be offered on] the altar11 or one of the sin-offerings that was consigned to death12 outside [the Temple Courtyard], he is exempt.13 [The rationale is that Leviticus 17:414] mentions "before the Sanctuary of God." Whenever [an animal] is not fit to be come to the Sanctuary of God, one is not liable [for its slaughter].


אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא עַל שְׁחִיטַת קָדָשִׁים הָרְאוּיִין לִקָּרֵב לְגַבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ. אֲבָל הַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּחוּץ אֶחָד מֵאִסּוּרֵי מִזְבֵּחַ אוֹ מֵחַטָּאוֹת הַמֵּתוֹת הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז ד) "לִפְנֵי מִשְׁכַּן ה'" וְכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לָבוֹא אֶל מִשְׁכַּן ה' אֵין חַיָּבִין עָלָיו:


If one slaughters an animal that is unacceptable because of a time factor involving its body15 or the status of its owners16 outside the Temple Courtyard], he is exempt.17 [The rationale is that] in its present state, it is not fit to be brought into the Temple Courtyard.18


שָׁחַט בַּחוּץ מְחֻסַּר זְמַן בְּגוּפוֹ אוֹ בַּבְּעָלִים הוֹאִיל וְאֵינוֹ רָאוּי עַתָּה לָבוֹא בִּפְנִים פָּטוּר:


What is meant by a disqualifying time factor involving its body? An animal in the seven days following its birth,19 turtle-doves which have not reached the stage of development at which time [they are fit to be sacrificed],20 and an animal and its offspring; for if one slaughters one on a particular day, the other is not fit to be slaughtered until the morrow.21


אֵי זֶהוּ מְחֻסַּר זְמַן בְּגוּפוֹ. בְּהֵמָה בְּתוֹךְ שִׁבְעַת יְמֵי הַלֵּידָה. וְתוֹרִין שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּן. וְאוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ שֶׁנִּשְׁחַט אֶחָד מֵהֶם הַיּוֹם שֶׁאֵין הַשֵּׁנִי רָאוּי עַד לְמָחָר:


What is meant by a disqualifying time factor involving the status of its owners? A sacrifice whose owners have not reached the appropriate stage of time to offer it.

What is implied? If a zav,22 a zavah,23 and a woman who gave birth24 slaughtered [the animal designated for] their sin-offerings outside [the Temple Courtyard] during the days of their counting,25 they are exempt. Similarly, if a person afflicted with tzara'at26 slaughtered his sin-offering and[/or] his guilt-offering outside [the Temple Courtyard] during the days of his counting,27 he is exempt, for the owners of these sacrifices are not yet fit for their atonement. Nevertheless, if these individuals slaughtered their burnt-offerings28 outside [the Temple Courtyard] during the days of their counting, they are liable. [The rationale is that] a burnt-offering is a present29 and it is the sin-offering and the guilt-offering which are the fundamental [factors leading to] atonement.

Similarly, when a nazirite slaughters his sin-offering outside [the Temple Courtyard] during the days of his nazirite vow, he is exempt.30 If he offered his burnt-offering or his peace-offering outside [the Temple Courtyard], he is liable. For the sin-offering is what prevents him [from completing his nazirite vow] and it is the fundamental dimension [of the conclusion of] his nazirite vow.


וְאֵי זֶהוּ מְחֻסַּר זְמַן בַּבְּעָלִים. קָרְבָּן שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא הִגִּיעַ זְמַן בְּעָלָיו לְהַקְרִיבוֹ. כֵּיצַד. הַזָּב וְהַזָּבָה וְהַיּוֹלֶדֶת שֶׁשָּׁחֲטוּ חַטָּאתָם בַּחוּץ [בְּתוֹךְ] יְמֵי סְפִירָה פְּטוּרִין. וְכֵן מְצֹרָע שֶׁשָּׁחַט חַטָּאתוֹ וַאֲשָׁמוֹ בַּחוּץ בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי הַסְּפִירָה פָּטוּר. שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא נִרְאוּ בַּעֲלֵי הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת הָאֵלּוּ לְכַפָּרָה. אֲבָל אִם שָׁחֲטוּ עוֹלוֹתֵיהֶן בַּחוּץ בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי הַסְּפִירָה חַיָּבִין. שֶׁהָעוֹלָה דּוֹרוֹן הִיא וְהַחַטָּאת וְהָאָשָׁם הִיא עִקַּר הַכַּפָּרָה. וְכֵן נָזִיר שֶׁשָּׁחַט חַטָּאתוֹ בַּחוּץ בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי נְזִירוּתוֹ פָּטוּר. הִקְרִיב עוֹלָתוֹ אוֹ שְׁלָמָיו בַּחוּץ חַיָּב שֶׁהַחַטָּאת הִיא הַמְּעַכַּבְתּוֹ וְהִיא עִקַּר הַנְּזִירוּת:


When a person offers a conditional guilt-offering31 or sin-offering of fowl that is brought because of a doubt32 outside [the Temple Courtyard], he is exempt. [The rationale is that] it was not definitely established that a prohibition [was violated].33 When a guilt-offering for one afflicted by tzara'at was slaughtered outside [the Temple Courtyard], but not for the desired intent, [the one who slaughters it] is liable. [The rationale is that] since [when such a sacrifice is] not [slaughtered] for the desired intent in [the Temple Courtyard], it is deemed appropriate and acceptable, as will be explained.34

Whenever one is exempt for slaughtering a sacrificial [animal] outside the [Temple Courtyard], one is also exempt for offering it there.


אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְחַטָּאת הָעוֹף הַבָּאָה עַל הַסָּפֵק שֶׁהִקְרִיבָן בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא נִקְבַּע הָאִסּוּר. אָשָׁם מְצֹרָע שֶׁשְּׁחָטוֹ בַּחוּץ שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ חַיָּב הוֹאִיל וְשֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ רָאוּי בִּפְנִים וְכָשֵׁר כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. וְכָל קָרְבָּן שֶׁהוּא פָּטוּר עַל שְׁחִיטָתוֹ בַּחוּץ כָּךְ הוּא פָּטוּר עַל הַעֲלָאָתוֹ:


[The following rules apply if] one slaughters the two goats offered on Yom Kippur35 outside [the Temple Courtyard]. Before [the High Priest] recites the confessional over them,36 he is liable for both of them,37 since [they are both] fit to come before God for the confessional. After [the High Priest] recited the confessional, one is exempt for slaughtering [the goat] that is sent [to Azazel], because it is no longer fit to come before God [as a sacrifice].


שְׁנֵי שְׂעִירֵי יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁשְּׁחָטָם בַּחוּץ. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא הִתְוַדָּה עֲלֵיהֶם חַיָּב כָּרֵת עַל שְׁנֵיהֶן הוֹאִיל וּרְאוּיִין לָבוֹא לִפְנֵי הַשֵּׁם לְוִדּוּי. וְאִם אַחַר שֶׁהִתְוַדָּה פָּטוּר עַל הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לָבוֹא לִפְנֵי הַשֵּׁם:


When one slaughters [animals designated as] peace-offerings outside [the Temple Courtyard], before the gates of the Temple building are opened, he is exempt, for a [necessary] deed is lacking. [Only] afterwards are they fit to be offered before God, as we explained.38

One who slaughters a Paschal sacrifice outside [the Temple Courtyard] - even during the other days of the year, whether for the sake of the Paschal sacrifice or for another purpose39 - is liable. [The rationale is that] during the remainder of the year, a Paschal sacrifice [that is offered] is considered as a peace-offering.40


הַשּׁוֹחֵט שְׁלָמִים בַּחוּץ קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּפָּתְחוּ דַּלְתוֹת הַהֵיכָל פָּטוּר. שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵן מְחֻסָּרִים מַעֲשֶׂה וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִהְיוּ רְאוּיִין לִקָּרֵב לִפְנֵי הַשֵּׁם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וְהַשּׁוֹחֵט אֶת הַפֶּסַח בַּחוּץ אֲפִלּוּ בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה בֵּין לִשְׁמוֹ בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמוֹ חַיָּב. שֶׁהַפֶּסַח בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה שְׁלָמִים הוּא:


When the fetus [being carried by] an ordinary animal was consecrated [as a sacrifice for] the altar, it is forbidden to slaughter [the mother] outside [the Temple Courtyard].41 If he slaughtered it, he is not liable for lashes, because it42 is not fit to come before God [as a sacrifice].


בֶּהֱמַת חֻלִּין שֶׁעֵבָּרָהּ קָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ אָסוּר לְשָׁחֳטָהּ בַּחוּץ. וְאִם שְׁחָטָהּ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לָבוֹא לִפְנֵי הַשֵּׁם:


When one stole [an animal] and consecrated it, and afterwards, slaughtered it outside [the Temple Courtyard], he is liable.43 From which time was it considered in his property with regard to his being liable for karet for it? From the time he consecrated it.

[The above applies] provided he slaughtered it after [the owner] despaired of its return. [If he slaughtered it] before then, by contrast, the consecration is not effective.44


גָּנַב וְהִקְדִּישׁ וְאַחַר כָּךְ שָׁחַט בַּחוּץ חַיָּב. וּמֵאֵימָתַי הֶעֱמִידוּהָ בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ כְּדֵי לְחַיְּבוֹ עָלֶיהָ כָּרֵת. מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁהִקְדִּישָׁהּ. וְהוּא שֶׁשְּׁחָטָהּ אַחַר יֵאוּשׁ אֲבָל לִפְנֵי יֵאוּשׁ אֵינָהּ קְדוֹשָׁה:


If the entire body of the animal was outside [the Temple Courtyard] and its neck was inside and one slaughtered it, he is liable,45 as [Leviticus 17:3] states: "[Any man]...who will slaughter an ox, a sheep, or a goat in the camp or who will slaughter outside the camp... [and he has not brought it as an offering]." This applies whether the one who slaughters is standing in the Temple [Courtyard] and the animal's neck was inside, but the remainder of its body was outside, or its body was inside and its neck was outside. He is liable unless the animal was entirely within the Temple [Courtyard], as [implied by ibid.:9]: "And he will not bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting."46 If, however, one slaughters on the roof of the Temple Building, even though it is not fit for sacrifice at all,47 he is exempt.48


הָיְתָה הַבְּהֵמָה כֻּלָּהּ בַּחוּץ וְצַוָּארָהּ בִּפְנִים וְשָׁחַט חַיָּב שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז ג) "אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁחַט שׁוֹר אוֹ כֶּבֶשׂ אוֹ עֵז בַּמַּחֲנֶה אוֹ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁחַט מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה". אֶחָד הַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ וְצַוָּארָהּ בִּפְנִים וּשְׁאָר גּוּף הַבְּהֵמָה בַּחוּץ אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה גּוּפָהּ בִּפְנִים וְצַוָּארָהּ בַּחוּץ חַיָּב עַד שֶׁתִּהְיֶה הַבְּהֵמָה כֻּלָּהּ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז ט) "וְאֶל פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֹא יְבִיאֶנּוּ". אֲבָל הַשּׁוֹחֵט בְּגַגּוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לִזְבִיחָה כְּלָל הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר:


Two people who held a knife and slaughtered [a sacrificial animal] outside [the Temple Courtyard] are exempt,49 for [the prooftexts] say "who will slaughter" "or who will slaughter"50 [implying] one and not two.51

When one slaughters a sacrificial animal outside [the Temple Courtyard] even though he had no intention of sacrificing this animal to God,52 he is liable.53 This is [implied by the prooftext]: "It will be considered as [the shedding of] blood for that person. He has shed blood."54 [One can infer that] even if [the person slaughtering] thinks of the blood [from the sacrificial animal] as blood that was shed55 and not as a sacrifice, he is liable.


שְׁנַיִם שֶׁאָחֲזוּ בַּסַּכִּין וְשָׁחֲטוּ בַּחוּץ פְּטוּרִין שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁחַט (ויקרא יז ג) "אוֹ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁחַט" אֶחָד וְלֹא שְׁנַיִם. וְאֶחָד שֶׁשָּׁחַט בַּחוּץ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְכַּוֵּן לִשְׁחֹט קָדָשִׁים אֵלּוּ לַה' הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יז ד) "דָּם יֵחָשֵׁב לָאִישׁ הַהוּא דָּם שָׁפָךְ". אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁזֶּה הַדָּם בְּמַחֲשַׁבְתּוֹ כַּדָּם הַנִּשְׁפָּךְ לֹא כַּקָּרְבָּן הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב:


A person who slaughters [a sacrificial animal] outside [the Temple Courtyard] at night is liable, since slaughtering an animal56 is acceptable at night. Similarly, if, at night, one offered as a sacrifice [an animal] he slaughtered at night outside [the Temple Courtyard], he is liable for offering it as a sacrifice.57

If, however, one slaughtered [a sacrificial animal] inside [the Temple Courtyard] at night and offered it as a sacrifice outside,58 he is exempt. [The rationale is that] he offered merely an unacceptable article,59 for there is no conception of acceptable slaughter in the Temple at night.60 Similarly, if one received [the blood of a sacrificial animal] with an ordinary vessel61 inside [the Temple Courtyard], but poured it [on an altar] outside, he is exempt.62


הַשּׁוֹחֵט בַּחוּץ בַּלַּיְלָה חַיָּב הוֹאִיל וְהַשְּׁחִיטָה בַּלַּיְלָה כְּשֵׁרָה בַּחוּץ. וְכֵן אִם הֶעֱלָה בַּלַּיְלָה מִזֶּה שֶׁשָּׁחַט בַּחוּץ בַּלַּיְלָה חַיָּב עַל הַעֲלָאָה. אֲבָל אִם שָׁחַט בִּפְנִים בַּלַּיְלָה וְהֶעֱלָה בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר. לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא הֶעֱלָה אֶלָּא דָּבָר פָּסוּל שֶׁאֵין לְךָ שְׁחִיטָה כְּשֵׁרָה בַּלַּיְלָה בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. וְכֵן אִם קִבֵּל בִּכְלִי חֹל בִּפְנִים וְזָרַק בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר:


Similarly, when a person performs melikah on a fowl outside [the Temple Courtyard], he is exempt.63 If he offered it [as a sacrifice there], he is exempt. If he performs melikah on a fowl inside [the Temple Courtyard], but offered it outside, he is liable for offering it.64

If one slaughtered [a fowl] in [the Temple Courtyard]65 and offered it outside, he is exempt, for he offered something that is not fit to be offered. If he slaughtered the fowl outside [the Temple Courtyard] and offered it outside, he is liable twice,66 because slaughtering a fowl outside [the Temple Courtyard] is acceptable. It is comparable to performing melikah inside.


וְכֵן הַמּוֹלֵק אֶת הָעוֹף בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר. וְאִם הֶעֱלָהוּ פָּטוּר. מָלַק בִּפְנִים וְהֶעֱלָה בַּחוּץ חַיָּב עַל הַעֲלָאָה. שָׁחַט בִּפְנִים וְהֶעֱלָהוּ בַּחוּץ פָּטוּר שֶׁלֹּא הֶעֱלָה אֶלָּא דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לִקָּרֵב. שָׁחַט אֶת הָעוֹף בַּחוּץ וְהֶעֱלָהוּ בַּחוּץ חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁהַשְּׁחִיטָה בַּחוּץ כְּשֵׁרָה וַהֲרֵי הִיא כִּמְלִיקָה בִּפְנִים:

Test Yourself on This Chapter


Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 84) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 440) include this commandment as one of the Torah's 613 mitzvot.


The Kessef Mishneh explains that this excludes sacrifices from fowl, but this understanding is not accepted by all authorities.


Temurah 21a states that the firstborn offering is not included in this commandment.


Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 85) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 453) include this commandment as one of the Torah's 613 mitzvot. The Ramban differs and maintains that this should not be considered as an independent mitzvah.


The one stated in the previous halachah.


Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 90) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 186) include this prohibition as one of the Torah's 613 mitzvot. There are several historical dimensions to this prohibition. First of all, in the era between the destruction of the Sanctuary of Shiloh and the construction of the Temple, it was permitted to offer sacrifices on bemot (literally, "high-places"), i.e., individual altars. See the notes to Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 1:3 which explain the transition between these periods. It is also relevant with regard to the sanctuary constructed by Chonio, the son of Shimon the Just, described in the notes to Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 9:14.


Literally, the soul's being cut off. This involves premature death in this world (before the age of 50, Mo'ed Kattan 28a) and the soul not meriting a portion in the world to come (Hilchot Teshuvah 8:1).


This term is used to distinguish this sacrifice from the adjustable guilt offering. See Hilchot Shegagot 1:4.


Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 89) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 439) include this prohibition as one of the Torah's 613 mitzvot.


This applies even if he performed both transgressions without realizing the prohibitions involved in the interim, for they are two separate transgressions that are not dependent on each other (Radbaz).


I.e., the animals mentioned in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach.


See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 4:1 for a definition of this term.


It is, however, forbidden to do so.


The source for this prohibition, as stated in Halachah 3.


See the following halachah.


See Halachah 9.


It is, however, forbidden to do so.


The prohibition involves slaughtering sacrificial animals and since these animals are not fit to be sacrificed or their owners are not fit to sacrifice them, they are not considered sacrificial animals in the full sense.


See Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 3:8 which states that it is a positive commandment to offer sacrificial animals after eight days of life, but not before.


See ibid.:2 which states that "Turtledoves are acceptable when [their feathers all] are of a golden hue." Before this stage, they are not acceptable (ibid.:9).


See Hilchot Shechitah 12:1-2 which states that it is forbidden to sacrifice an animal and its offspring on the same day. No matter which is slaughtered first, one must wait until the following day to sacrifice the other.


A person with a physical affliction somewhat similar to gonorrhea that renders one ritually impure and obligates him to bring a set of sacrifices (see Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 1:1, 3-4; 2:1).


A woman who bleeds for three consecutive days after the seven days associated with her menstrual period. This renders her ritually impure and obligates her to bring a set of sacrifices (see ibid. 1:1, 3-4,6)


Who is ritually impure after giving birth and must bring a set of sacrifices (see ibid. 1:1, 3, 5).


As explained in the above sources, a zav and a zavah must wait seven "spotless days" after their condition ceases before bringing their sacrifices. A woman must wait 40 days after giving birth to a male and 80 days after giving birth to a female before bringing her sacrifices.


A skin affliction similar to, but not identical with leprosy that is a spiritual manifestation of the impurity resulting from improper speech (the conclusion of Hilchot Tuma'at Tzara'at). Such a person must bring a set of sacrifices when emerging from ritual impurity (see Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 1:1, 3-4).


Such a person must also wait seven days after his condition ceases before bringing his sacrifices.


The sacrifices of all of these individuals include a burnt-offering and a sin-offering and the sacrifice of a person emerging from tzara'at also includes a guilt-offring.


To appease God and restore His favor.


See Hilchot Nezirut, ch. 8, for the details regarding the sacrifices a nazirite must bring upon completion of his nazirite vow. He may not bring these sacrifices beforehand.


See Hilchot Shegagot, Chapter 8, for a description of the situations which warrant bringing these sacrifices.


See Hilchot Mechusrei Kapparah 1:7 which describes the situations under which such sacrifices should be brought.


With regard to these sacrifices, it is possible that it will be discovered that the person definitely did sin. In such an instance, the sacrifice is not offered. If the sacrificial animal has not been slaughtered, it is left to pasture until it contracts a blemish. If it was slaughtered, its blood is poured down the drainage channel. Since there is a possibility of this taking place, the animal is not deemed a sacrificial animal in the full sense and one is not liable for slaughtering it or offering it.

The Ra'avad accepts the Rambam's ruling with regard to a sin-offering of fowl brought because of a doubt since only its blood is offered on the altar, but not its body. Hence, there is room to free one from the obligations involved with a sacrificial animal. Nevertheless, he argues, a conditional guilt-offering is offered on the altar. Hence one should be liable for slaughtering and offering it outside the Temple. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh question the Ra'avad's objection, noting that the Rambam's ruling has its basis in Keritot 18a.


As stated in Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 15:1, with the exception of a sin-offering or a Paschal sacrifice, whenever a sacrificial animal was slaughtered for the sake of an offering other the one for which it was intended, it is acceptable, but it does not fulfill the obligation of the owner (see also ibid.:20). Since the sacrifice would be acceptable if it was offered in the Temple, the person is liable for slaughtering it outside.


The goat sent to Azazel and its pair whose blood is taken into the Holy of Holies. See Hilchot Avodat Yom HaKippurim 1:1.


More precisely, the confessional is recited only over the one sent to Azazel (ibid. 4:2).

The Ra'avad objects to the Rambam's ruling, maintaining that the matter is dependent not only the confessional, but on the lottery in which the goats are designated for their respective purposes. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh explain that the Rambam's ruling is based on Zevachim 113a. Although there are other interpretations of that passage, the Rambam has a foundation for his decision.


Or for either of them, were he to slaughter only one.


See Chapter 5, Halachah 5, which states that the gates to the Temple building must be open for the slaughter of peace offerings to be acceptable.


The Kessef Mishneh emphasizes that this applies only during the remainder of the year. The rationale is that as explained below, during the remainder of the year, an animal designated as a Paschal sacrifice is considered as a peace-offering and a peace-offering is not disqualified if it is not offered for the desired intent. On the day preceding Pesach, when the Paschal sacrifice is offered, it is unacceptable if it is not offered for the desired intent. Hence on that date, were someone to slaughter an animal designated for this purpose for the sake of another sacrifice outside the Temple Courtyard, he would not be liable.


See Hilchot Korban Pesach 4:7. Since it is considered as a peace-offering, just as one is liable for slaughtering an animal designated as a peace-offering outside the Temple Courtyard, so too, he is liable for slaughtering such an animal.


Since the fetus it is carrying will later be offered as a sacrifice, it is forbidden to cause that sacrifice to be disqualified.


Neither the mother nor the fetus.


Even though the animal did not belong to him and hence, he had no right to consecrate it, our Sages considered it as his own so that he would be liable for karet. See Gittin 55b. The Kessef Mishneh raises questions on the Rambam's ruling based on that passage, but Rav Yosef Corcus resolves the Rambam's decision.


For then it is still considered as belonging to the owner. Hence, the thief's consecration is not effective. See Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 5:7 which speaks of the disqualification of a thief's offering. From Hilchot Geneivah 2:6, it appears that the thief must have also consecrated the animal after the owner's despair and not before. Otherwise, the consecration would not be effective.


Karet or lashes for slaughtering the animal outside the Temple Courtyard.


The Kessef Mishneh notes that Zevachim 107b uses this prooftext to teach the following concept: that one who slaughters on the roof of the Temple Building is exempt. Hence he suggests that a printing error crept into the Mishneh Torah and that the text should be amended to fit the Talmud's teaching. This conception is not, however, shared by all authorities.


See Chapter 5, Halachah 4.


For he did not slaughter the animal outside the Temple Courtyard.


Note the contrast to Chapter 19, Halachah 12, with regard to offering an animal as a sacrifice.


The verses use a singular form.


The commentaries note that although the Rambam's ruling has a source in Zevachim 108a and in the Sifri, his process of exegesis is different than that used in those sources.


But instead was slaughtering it for mundane purposes.


In this as well, there is a contrast to offering an animal as a sacrifice, as stated in Chapter 19, Halachah 1.


Here also, the Rambam's method of exegesis is different from that of his apparent source, Zevachim 108b. Significantly, in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Zevachim 13:3), he cites the method of exegesis used by the Talmud.


Literally, "poured out."


I.e., an ordinary animal, not one designated as a sacrifice.


The Ra'avad maintains that the person is exempt in such a situation. The Radbaz justifies the Rambam's ruling, explaining that there is a fundamental difference between slaughtering an animal inside the Temple Courtyard and slaughtering it outside. When it is slaughtered inside the Temple Courtyard at night, it is disqualified as a sacrifice, because of it having been slaughtered at night and hence, it is not acceptable wherever it was offered. If, by contrast, it was slaughtered outside the Temple Courtyard, it becomes placed in the category of animals slaughtered in such a place. Hence the time when it is offered is not significant. The Kessef Mishneh also justifies the Rambam's approach.


Even during the following day (Kessef Mishneh).


See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 3:6.


See Chapter 4, Halachah 1.


This disqualifies the sacrifice, for as stated in Chapter 5, Halachah 1, the blood of a sacrificial animal must be received in a sacred vessel.


For the animal was no longer acceptable as a sacrifice.


For the prooftext defining the prohibition (Leviticus 17:3) mentions slaughter, but not melikah (Zevachim 107a).


This is equivalent to slaughtering an animal inside the Temple Courtyard and offering it outside.


Thus disqualifying it, for in the Temple Courtyard, a fowl should be killed through melikah not ritual slaughter.


Both for slaughtering and for offering.

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah