Parah Adumah - Chapter 4

Two red heifers should not be slaughtered at the same time, as Numbers 19:3 states: "And you shall slaughter it."

If the red heifer did not desire to go out, a black one should not be taken out with it, so that it would not be said: "They slaughtered a black one." Nor is another red one taken out, so that it would not be said: "They slaughtered two at once."

When a red heifer was slaughtered with another intent in mind or its blood was received or sprinkled with another intent in mind, with the proper intent and another intent in mind, or with another intent and the proper intent in mind, it was offered by someone other than a priest, or it was offered by a priest lacking one or more of the priestly garments, while wearing the golden garments, or while wearing ordinary garments, it is unacceptable.

If it was slaughtered with the intent of partaking of its flesh or drinking its blood, it is acceptable. The rationale is that the expression "a pleasant fragrance" was not stated with regard to it.

If its blood was received in a container, it is unacceptable, as Numbers 19:4 states: "And Elazar the priest will take the blood with his finger." The mitzvah is performed with the finger and not with a utensil.

If he sprinkled the blood, even one sprinkling with a utensil, the sprinkling is unacceptable. If he performed one sprinkling with his left hand, it is unacceptable. If seven priests sprinkled the blood at the same time, their sprinkling is unacceptable. If they did so one after the other, it is acceptable.

If he sprinkled the blood, but did not direct it to the Sanctuary, it is unacceptable, as ibid. states: "opposite the front of the Tent of Meeting." Implied is that he should direct it toward the Sanctuary and see the Sanctuary. Similarly, if he slaughtered it or burnt it not opposite the Sanctuary, it is unacceptable, as implied by Numbers 19:3: "He shall slaughter it before him."

When does the above apply? When he sprinkled the blood or burnt or slaughtered the heifer southward or northward, or with his back to the Sanctuary. If, however, he stood between the east and the west and faced the Sanctuary, even if he did not direct himself toward the Sanctuary exactly, it is acceptable.

If one of the sprinklings is lacking, it is unacceptable. If one dipped his finger in the blood twice and sprinkled once, the sprinkling is unacceptable. If he dipped his finger once and sprinkled twice, even if he did not count the second sprinkling and instead, dipped his finger and sprinkled a second time, it is unacceptable.

What is implied? He dipped his finger in the blood for the sixth time and performed the sixth and seventh sprinklings, it is unacceptable, even if he dipped his finger in the blood again and sprinkled it a seventh time. If, after dipping his finger into the blood for the seventh time, he performed a seventh and eighth sprinkling - even if he dipped his finger into the blood an eighth time and then sprinkled it an eighth time, it is acceptable, for any addition over the seven is of no consequence, provided it is another priest making the addition. If, however, the priest burning it made the additional sprinkling, it is unacceptable, because he involved himself in an unnecessary activity while burning it.

If one removed the blood from its arrangement and then sprinkled it, it is invalid.

If one sprinkled its blood at night - even if one performed seven sprinklings during the day and one at night - it is unacceptable.

If one slaughtered it outside the place where it is burnt, even if one slaughtered it within the walls of Jerusalem, it is unacceptable.

If one burnt it outside the arrangement on which it was slaughtered, it was divided in two and burnt in two arrangements, or two heifers were burned on one arrangement, it is disqualified. If it was already reduced to ashes, one may bring another one and slaughter it over the ashes of the first without any qualms.

If one skinned it and cut it into pieces and then burnt it in its entirety, it is acceptable. If any slight part of its substance, even its dung, is lacking, it is unacceptable. If an olive-sized portion of its skin, meat, or even its hair flew off its pyre, it should be returned. If he did not return it, it is unacceptable.

If it flew outside its arrangement, one should place much wood over it and burn it in its place. If its horns, its hooves, or its dung flew off, they need not be returned to the pyre.

The red heifer is not disqualified if it is left overnight without being burnt. Therefore if it was slaughtered on one day and its blood sprinkled as required and then it was burned on the following day, it is acceptable.

If the priest who burns it is in the acute state of onein mourning or is lacking atonement, it is acceptable.

If one burnt it without sanctifying his hands and feet, it is invalid, because the process of offering the red heifer is comparable to sacrificial worship.

Where does he sanctify his hands and feet? From a consecrated vessel in the Temple Courtyard. If one consecrated them outside the Temple Courtyard with an ordinary vessel, even with a tiny earthenware cup, it is acceptable, because the entire process of offering the heifer is performed outside.

When the priest who burns the red heifer immerses himself after he is made impure, as we explained, he need not sanctify his hands and feet again, since the entire process of offering it is performed by those who immersed that day.

If one burnt it without wood or with all types of wood, even with straw and stubble, it is acceptable. The optimum way of performing the mitzvah is not to reduce the wood less than is appropriate. On the contrary, one should add to it bundles of hyssop and Greek hyssop while it is burning to increase the amount of ashes. One may add to its conflagration until the heifer itself is reduced to ashes. Once it is reduced to ashes, if one added even one piece of wood to it, it is like one who mixed ashes from a range with the ashes of the red heifer.

All of the activities performed with the red heifer from the beginning to the end must be performed only during the day and by male priests and the performance of work disqualifies it until it is reduced to ashes. Once it is reduced to ashes, it is acceptable even if its ashes were collected at night, by a woman, or one performed another task while collecting them.

What is the source that teaches that the collection of the ashes is acceptable if performed by any person with the exception of a deafmute, an intellectually or emotionally incapable person, or a minor? It is written Numbers 19:9: "And a pure man shall gather the ashes of the heifer." It can be derived that a priest is not required. Moreover, it is as if it said "a pure person," i.e., either a man or a woman.

What source teaches that the performance of work disqualifies it? Ibid.:3 states: "And he shall slaughter it." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this phrase comes solely to teach that if the priest becomes involved in another task at the time of slaughter, it is unacceptable. And ibid.:5 states: "And the heifer shall be burnt before his eyes," i.e., his eyes should be concentrated on it. This teaches that the performance of work causes it to be disqualified from the time of its slaughter until it is reduced to ashes. Anyone involved in burning it who performs another task disqualifies it until it is reduced to ashes.

If one slaughtered the heifer and another animal was slaughtered with it or a gourd was cut with it, it is acceptable because he did not intend to perform work. This applies even though the animal that was slaughtered with it is acceptable to be eaten, for the slaughter of ordinary animals does not require concentrated intent. If, however, one had the intent of cutting the gourd and it was cut while he was slaughtering the red heifer, the heifer is disqualified, because work was performed during its slaughter.