Following the Majority Learned From the Sacrificial Head

From where is this matter that the Sages said, "go after the majority"? From where do we derive it? As it is written, "to incline after the many" (Exodus 23:2). A majority that is before us, such as nine shops [where meat is sold as kosher and one where it is not] or a Sanhedrin, does not trouble us. What troubles us is a majority that is not before us, such as a minor boy or a minor girl [whose status cannot be examined directly]. From where do we derive it? Rabbi Elazar said: it comes from the head of the burnt offering, for Scripture says, "And he shall cut it into its pieces" - and not its pieces into pieces. Let us be concerned that perhaps the membrane of the brain was perforated [rendering the animal unfit]. Rather, is it not because we say, go after the majority [and most animals are sound]? How so? Perhaps he splits it and examines it. And if the concern is "it into its pieces and not its pieces into pieces," that applies only where he cuts it entirely through, but where he does not cut it entirely through, we have no objection. Mar bar Rav Ashi said: it comes from the breaking of a bone at Passover, for the Merciful One said, "and you shall not break a bone in it" (Exodus 12:46). Let us be concerned that perhaps the membrane of the brain was perforated. Rather, is it not because we say, go after the majority? How so? Perhaps he places a coal upon it and burns and examines it. As it is taught: but one who cuts through sinews and one who burns through bones is not subject to the prohibition of breaking a bone. Rav Nahman said: it comes from the fat-tail, for the Merciful One said, "its fat, the whole fat-tail" (Leviticus 3:9). Let us be concerned that perhaps the spinal cord was severed. Rather, is it not because we say, go after the majority? And should you say he cuts it from below, the Merciful One said, "close by the backbone" (there) - the place where the kidneys give counsel [the lower spine]. How so? Perhaps he opens it and examines it. And if the concern is "the whole fat-tail," that applies only where he cuts it entirely through, but where he leaves it joined, we have no objection. Rav Sheshet son of Rav Idi said: it comes from the heifer whose neck is broken, for the Merciful One said "the one whose neck is broken" - it must be whole. Let us be concerned that perhaps it is an animal with a fatal defect. Rather, is it not because we say, go after the majority? And should you say, what difference does it make - the school of Rabbi Yannai said atonement is written concerning it, like consecrated offerings. Rabbah bar Rav Shila said: it comes from the red heifer, for the Merciful One said, "and he shall slaughter and burn" (Numbers 19:3-5) - just as its slaughter is when it is whole, so its burning is when it is whole. Let us be concerned that perhaps it has a fatal defect. Rather, is it not because the Merciful One said, go after the majority? And should you say, what difference does it make - the Merciful One called it a sin offering. Rav Aha bar Yaakov said: it comes from the goat sent away, for the Merciful One said, "and he shall take the two goats" (Leviticus 16:7) - that the two of them be alike. Let us be concerned that perhaps one of them has a fatal defect. Rather, is it not because we say, go after the majority? And should you say, what difference does it make - the lot establishes nothing except for a thing fit for the Name. And should you say we examine it, we have learned: it did not reach the half of the mountain before it was made limb from limb. Rav Dimi said: it comes from one who strikes his father and mother, for the Merciful One said, put him to death. Let us be concerned that perhaps the man is not his father. Rather, it is because the Merciful One said, go after the majority, and most of a woman's relations are with her husband. How so? Perhaps it is a case where his father and mother were imprisoned together; he holds that there is no guardian against forbidden relations. Rav Kahana said: it comes from one who kills a person, for the Merciful One said, put him to death. Let us be concerned that perhaps the victim had a fatal defect. Rather, is it not because we say, go after the majority? And should you say we examine the corpse - it would be disgraced. And should you say, for the sake of the slain one's soul, let it be disgraced - let us still be concerned that perhaps where the sword fell there was already a perforation. Ravina said: it comes from scheming witnesses, for the Merciful One said, "and you shall do to him as he schemed." Yet perhaps the one against whom they testified had a fatal defect. Rather, is it not because we say, go after the majority? And should you say we examine him, it is taught: Rabbi Elazar HaKappar says: if they did not yet kill him, they are executed; if they already killed him, they are not executed. Rav Ashi said: it comes from slaughter itself, for the Merciful One said, slaughter and eat. Let us be concerned that perhaps he slaughtered at the place of a perforation. Rather, is it not because the Merciful One said, go after the majority? Rav Ashi said: I stated this teaching before Rav Kahana, and he said: perhaps where it is possible to examine, it is possible, and where it is not possible to examine, it is not possible. For if you do not say so, then according to Rabbi Meir, who is concerned for the minority, he would never eat meat. And should you say, indeed so - what is there to say about the Passover offering and consecrated offerings? Rather, where examination is possible it is possible, and where examination is not possible it is not possible.