Why the Sin Offering Bull Is Burned and Not Eaten

Another interpretation: since it says "and make one a sin offering and one a burnt offering," one might think the sin offering always precedes the burnt offering; Scripture says "and a second bull you shall take for a sin offering." One might then think the burnt offering precedes the sin offering in every act; Scripture says "and make one a sin offering and one a burnt offering to the LORD." How so? The blood of the sin offering precedes the blood of the burnt offering, because it secures favor, while the limbs of the burnt offering precede the portions of the sin offering, because they are wholly consumed by the fire. Rabbi Shimon says: what does "a second bull" teach? If to say they are two, it already says "and make one a sin offering and one a burnt offering"; so why "a second bull"? Lest one think this sin offering is eaten; Scripture says "a second bull," second to the burnt offering: just as the burnt offering is not eaten, so this sin offering is not eaten. Similarly Rabbi Yosi said of "those who came from the captivity, the children of the exile, offered burnt offerings to the God of Israel, twelve bulls for all Israel, ninety-six rams, seventy-seven lambs, twelve he-goats for a sin offering, all a burnt offering to the LORD" (Ezra 8:35): can you say a sin offering is a burnt offering? Rather, just as the burnt offering is not eaten, so the sin offering was not eaten. And so Rabbi Yehudah would say: they brought them for idolatry. Rabbi Shimon says: wherever "calf" is said in the Torah without qualification it means one of a year, as it says "a calf and a lamb of a year" (Leviticus 9:3); "a young of the herd" means one of two years, as it says "a calf, a young of the herd, for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering, unblemished" (Leviticus 9:2), so too unblemished in years; a bull without qualification is one of three years, and those of four and five are fit, but they do not bring the old ones out of respect.