Study Meilah folio 3A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
to say: Since a sin offering is brought for atonement, people do not distance themselves from it after it dies, as they realize that it is no longer fit to atone. Therefore, in order to ensure that people do not show disrespect, the rabbis decreed that one is liable for its misuse. But with regard
The Talmud asks: And is a sin offering that died subject to the halakhot of misuse? But didn’t we learn in a baraita: With regard to sin offerings that are left to die because they are no longer fit for the altar, from which one is prohibited to derive benefit, and likewise money from which one is p
They say in response to this question: With regard to sin offerings that are left to die, since even during their lifetimes people distance themselves from them, as they are no longer fit for sacrifice, there was no need for the rabbis to institute a prohibition of misuse. This is to the exclusion
§ The Talmud returns to the dispute with regard to offerings that were slaughtered in the wrong place and then were brought up to the altar. Rabba maintains that such offerings are removed from the altar while Rav Yosef rules that once they ascended the altar they do not descend from it and are burn
The Talmud elaborates: The Mishnah on Zevaḥim 66b, which deals with bird offerings that were disqualified for having either the napes of their necks pinched or their blood sprinkled in the wrong place, teaches: And all of the offerings mentioned in that Mishnah do not render one who swallows their m