Red Heifer, White Figs: b.Shevuot 11-13
In which we meet the ultimate fancy animal and discuss incense making
If you’re as tired as I am of this sugiyah, you will rejoice to learn that I’ve decided to go out with a bang and finish the rest of it in one fell swoop by distilling the interesting bits from pp. 11-13, of which there are several. The main issue that comes up in this residual discussion of sacrifices has to do with commingling the sacred and the profane—namely, what one can and cannot do with leftover sacred supplies.
The sages try to figure out whether the rules about animal meat can be analogized to a mishna dealing with surplus incense (m.Shekalim 4:5), whereby it is allowed to desacralize the incense and transfer its sanctity to the wages owed to the artisans, who are then paid with the incense instead (I can think of several people I met at various hippie forest retreats who might not be averse to this arrangement). This method solves the metaphysical question: where did the sanctity go? (קְדוּשָּׁה שֶׁבָּהֶן לְהֵיכָן הָלְכָה). But it turns out you can’t play the same game with animal sacrifices, as their sanctity is not fungible.
This leads to some hypothesizing about when consecration “attaches” (as something cannot be defiled if it is not sacred). Before incense is placed in the dedicated mortar, it is not sacred; same with meal offerings placed in a particular vessel. Some incense types can be consecrated by being declared sacred, and it turns out that different desecration rules apply depending on the consecration method.
An important difference between incense and meat offerings is that the former cannot be defiled by being left overnight, since it keeps the same form yearlong (צוּרָתָהּ בְּכׇל הַשָּׁנָה כּוּלָּהּ). This still does not solve the problem of where the sanctity goes when the incense, or the animal offering, is declared not sacred. Rabba suggests that it’s all about what the court declares. Abaye raises a problem: if something has inherent sanctity through the intent of bringing it as an offering, how can the court do away with that? Rabba explains: it depends whether the item—in this case, a ram—has been dedicated for a purpose that fits it.
What happens, for example, with animals dedicated to be sacrificed on a particular day who run away? I’m personally in favor of this scenario, so let’s get some inspiration:
The sages’ solution, unlike mine (which would be to let go of the animals and eat some rice and beans instead, and if you insist, leave a bowl of vegan chili or, as I’ve seen in Chinese Buddhist temples in town, some oranges on the altar) is that the lost animal shall be left to graze until it develops a malady (יִרְעוּ עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֲבוּ), and then is sold for charity (the assumption is that the court implicitly ordered this). But if the animal is not found, there’s no rule, as it’s a rare situation (שָׁאנֵי אֲבוּדִין, דְּלָא שְׁכִיחִי).
The gemara turns to discuss the case of a very special animal: a red heifer, which, according to Numbers 19, is the only animal whose charred ashes can purify you from the defilement of a dead body. There are some meticulous details about which cows count as pure enough and how to slaughter them, and the halakhic obsession with these cows is relentless: recently some nutcases even imported such cows from Texas and they’ve been linked to apocalyptic prophecies (ugh! eek!) This cow, Abaye says, can be redeemed; he cites Rabbi Shimon, who says that if the cow has already died or been slaughtered, the priest assesses how and for how much to sell it. It is only non-redeemable if it was properly slaughtered on the temple site. The permission to redeem the cow in all other circumstances comes from the fact that it is expensive (הוֹאִיל וְדָמֶיהָ יְקָרִין). Other animals are fungible—and the reason another could be sacrificed is that you can always leave the defiled one to graze, which you cannot do with incense.
The gemara mentions one interesting offering: white figs. Figs come in many varieties and colors, and the white ones were, apparently, favorites to bring to the altar because they are like”fruit honey” (דְּבַשׁ, Leviticus 2:11).
The last issue has to do with the severity of the offenses that the goats are meant to atone for. There is a long list of various impurities and transgressions, with corresponding views of the sages on which are atonable by a goat and which by a bull. It is of interest that the rabbis designate different animals for priests and for laypeople: the offenses that are atonable by a goat for a layperson are atonable by a bull in the case of a priest. I could go into all the twists and turns of this, but I’m beginning to feel resentful not only that the rabbis spent all this time on this impractical issue, but also of the yeshiva bohers who spend precious time in the 21st century on this stuff. The obsession with content is what led those crazies to import the red cows (not that the deranged plot to rebuild the temple and sacrifice them is any less civilized than what happens in factory farms, day in and day out, to less prestigious animals). It makes me worry about how we will handle entire tractates dealing with sacrifices.
The next chapter doesn’t really move away from the impurities issue, but there’s less offputting goat-related discussion, so things should be looking up in a couple of days. Hang in there, friends: Talmud is for everyone!
הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ שְׁבוּעוֹת שְׁתַּיִם