דם חטאת למטה ודם עולה למעלה טעון כיבוס
when the blood of a sin offering is below and the blood of a burnt offering is above, in a case in which the blood of a burnt offering is sprayed as a second layer on top of the blood of a sin offering that has already been sprayed and absorbed into a garment, the garment requires laundering.
בעי רבא דם עולה למטה ודם חטאת למעלה מהו משום נוגע הוא והא נוגע או דלמא משום בלוע הוא והא לא בלע (הוא) הדר פשטה דאין טעונין כיבוס
Rava asks: When the blood of a burnt offering is below and the blood of a sin offering is above, what is the halakha? Is one required to launder a garment to remove the blood of a sin offering because the blood touches his garment, and in this case, this blood is touching the garment? Or perhaps is one required to launder it because of the absorption of the blood into the garment, and, in this case, since the garment has already absorbed the other blood, this garment did not absorb the blood? Rava then resolves his dilemma, ruling that such garments do not require laundering.
אמר רבא פשיטא לי דם על בגדו חוצץ ואם טבח הוא אינו חוצץ רבב על בגדו חוצץ ואם מוכר רבב הוא אינו חוצץ בעי רבא דם ורבב על בגדו מהו
§ In a similar manner, with regard to the immersion of a garment that has become impure, Rava said: It is obvious to me that if there is blood on one’s garment, it interposes between the water of immersion and the garment, such that the immersion is ineffective. But if he is a butcher, used to having blood on his garments, a bloodstain does not interpose, and the immersion is effective, since a substance is not considered an interposition if the one immersing is not particular about it. Similarly, if there is a stain of fat [revav] on one’s garment, it interposes. But if he is a fat seller, such a stain does not interpose. Rava asks: If there is both blood and fat on one’s garment when he immerses it, what is the halakha?
אם טבח הוא תיפוק לי משום רבב ואי מוכר רבב הוא תיפוק לי משום דם לא צריכא דעביד הא והא אחדא לא קפיד אתרתי קפיד או דלמא אתרתי נמי לא קפיד תיקו:
The Gemara challenges the question: If he is a butcher, let me derive that the stain interposes due to the fat that he is not used to having on his garments; and conversely, if he is a fat seller, let me derive that the stain interposes due to the stain of blood that he is not used to having on his garments. The Gemara explains: No, this question is not superfluous; it is necessary with regard to a person who works both as this, a butcher, and as that, a fat seller. In such a case, the question is: Is it that he is not particular with regard to one stain, but he is particular with regard to two stains, so that the immersion is ineffective? Or, perhaps, is it that he is not particular even with regard to two stains, as neither is unusual for him? The Gemara provides no answer, and the question shall stand unresolved.
הדרן עלך דם חטאת
מתני׳ טבול יום ומחוסר כיפורים אינן חולקין בקדשים לאכול לערב
MISHNA: A priest who was ritually impure who immersed that day and is waiting for nightfall for the purification process to be completed, and a priest who has not yet brought an atonement offering to complete the purification process, e.g., a zav and a leper who did not bring their requisite atonement offerings, who are not yet permitted to partake of sacrificial meat, do not receive a share of sacrificial meat along with the other members of the patrilineal priestly family serving in the Temple that day, in order to partake of it in the evening after the offerings were sacrificed, even though after nightfall he would be permitted to partake of the offerings.
אונן (אינו) נוגע ואינו מקריב ואינו חולק לאכול לערב
A priest who is an acute mourner, i.e., if one of his relatives for whom he is obligated to mourn died that day, is permitted to touch sacrificial meat, as he is not ritually impure. But he may not sacrifice offerings, and he does not receive a share of sacrificial meat in order to partake of it in the evening.
בעלי מומין בין בעלי מומין עוברין בין בעלי מומין קבועין חולקין ואוכלין אבל לא מקריבין
Blemished priests, whether they are temporarily blemished or whether they are permanently blemished, receive a share and partake of the offerings with their priestly brethren, but do not sacrifice the offerings.
כל שאינו ראוי לעבודה אינו חולק בבשר וכל שאין לו בבשר אין לו בעורות
The principle is: Any priest who is unfit for the service that specific day does not receive a share of the sacrificial meat, and anyone who has no share of the meat has no share in the hides of the animals, to which the priests are entitled as well.
אפילו טמא בשעת זריקת דמים וטהור בשעת הקטר חלבים אינו חולק בבשר שנא' (ויקרא ז, לג) המקריב את דם השלמים [ואת החלב מבני אהרן] לו (יהיה) [תהיה שוק הימין למנה]:
Even if the priest was ritually impure only at the time of the sprinkling of the blood of the offering and he was pure at the time of the burning of the fats of that offering, he still does not receive a share of the meat, as it is stated: “He that sacrifices the blood of the peace offerings and the fat, from among the sons of Aaron, shall have the right thigh for a portion” (Leviticus 7:33). One who cannot sprinkle the blood does not receive a share in the meat.