Prima Secundae
Lecture 264: Sacrifices in the Old Law: Types, Animals, and Figurative Meaning

Transcript
================================================================================

And that's something less known, right? So the highest genera, the 10 categories, right? They are genera that are not species. And the lowest species are species that are not a genus, right? So what do you know first? A genus that is not a species and a species that is not a genus? Or something that is both a genus and a species? Well, I mean, when I say that substance and quantity and quality, the substance is a genus that is not a species, right? I'm negating species, right? So something that is both a genus and a species, wouldn't that be known before something is a genus but not a species? They have to know a negative through the front of there, right? And what is a species but not a genus? Take a simple example here. I'm a father and a son, right? Now, is there a father who's not a son? Maybe there's a son who's not a father, right? It seems you kind of know that afterwards, right, huh? You say to the students, can the same thing be both a whole and a part? You know, I mean, like Massachusetts is a part of New England, right? Yeah. But then New England is a part of the United States, you know? So these things that are both a whole and a part, you know, there are a lot of examples of those, right? How is there a part that is not a whole? Or is there a whole that is not a part? Well, I used to say to the students, huh? You had two main discoveries in the 20th century, right, huh? One was this special theory, special relativity, which led on to the general relativity, right? And the other was quantum theory, right, huh? Well, Einstein, after he invented the two theories of relativity, then he went looking for what? This has stimulated the cosmos, right? What is the cosmos? It's a whole that is not a part, see? Now, Heisenberg and the great quantum physicists, they went into studying the elementary particles, right? And they were looking for a part that is not a what? Whole, right? See? See? Now, I've seen some scientists say, you know, maybe we found water, we thought that was, you know, a fundamental thing, but then we had hydrogen-oxygen, and then we had photoelectron, and this goes on forever, right? Well, Heisenberg, Heisenberg, he says, I never thought this would go on forever, right? See? But when you got to the elementary party, we said, have we, you know, come to the end, right? But anyway, the point was, I said, Einstein was looking for a hole that is not a part, and Heisenberg was looking for a part that is not a hole, and they both thought they'd found it, right? What are you looking for? Or, but is it a hole that is not a part that's known to us than something that's both a hole and a part? And is it a part that is not a hole that's known to us that's both a hole and a part, right? So what's more known to us, huh? Before and after, or first and last? Because first is before everything else, but it's not after anything, right? And the end is something after everything. But can something be both a beginning and an end? Yeah, there's still something before it. There's something before the beginning of me. I was born on January 18th, 1936, but I think I must have begun my mother's womb already before 1935, right? But there's nothing before my beginning. Yeah, yeah. So I had a beginning, right? But maybe, you know, something before the beginning, right? So you see, first beginning, now you're talking about something, you know? First. Yeah, yeah. So if you're looking before and after, you're going to find a beginning and an end before you find the first beginning and the, what? Last end, right? Okay. So if I look before and after, I'm going to look before, before and after, which is look for a distinction, right? And if I'm going to look after before and after, I'm going to look for first and last and beginning and end, and at last for the first beginning and the last end. If there's such a thing, right? But it's less known to us, right? Yeah. But we find out that about God, right? So what are we doing here? He says, And therefore, in the offering of sacrifices, man protests, or professes, you might say, right? That God is the first beginning of creation of things and the last end, to which omnia, yeah, all things ought to be referred, right? Okay. So you know what you're doing and you offer sacrifice, right? I don't think people will stop and think about that, you know? But you're trying to make that, you know, recall that or think of that. Yeah. I remember reading through the Ingridian Symbolorum, you know, and of course, it seems like, oh, 18th century, the popes are correcting some German theologian, you know, who's got these, you know, pantheistic ideas, right? I don't, but I don't, you know, Warren Murray says that, C.S. Lewis says somewhere, you know, that pantheism is kind of the natural religion of that, right? He just thinks. He said one of the dangers facing just our American democracy was a lapse in the pantheism, if I'm recording. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's a tendency. Well, he talked about the danger of pantheism and democratic things, and we have to unite against that. And because it pertains to the right ordering of the mind to God, that the human mind does not recognize another first author of things except God alone, nor in some other thing does he constitute his own end, right? On account of this, one is prohibited in the law to offer a sacrifice to something other except to what? God, huh? That's interesting, right, huh? See, you offer a sacrifice only to God, right, huh? You can play, here comes the chief when the president walks in, but you can't sacrifice to him, right, huh? And, uh... As much as I please in the other way. Yeah, yeah. And therefore, as a cause of ceremonies about, what, sacrifices can be assigned a reason another way from this that through, what, things of this sort, men are withdrawn from the sacrifices to idols, huh? Whence also the precepts about sacrifices were not given to the people of the Jews until after they had, what, declined to idolatry, right? By adoring the, what, as if these sacrifices were instituted that the people that were prompt sacrificing, huh, would offer these sacrifices more to God than to idols, huh? Whence it is said in Jeremiah 7, huh? I have not spoken with your, what, fathers, and I did not command them in the day that I led them out of the land of Egypt about the word of holocausts and victims, huh? Now, among all the goods over which God gave to the human race, lapsed through, what, sin, most of all was that he gave his own son, right? Whence it is. is said in John 3.16. I'm still in loop. Going through the reading again. Thus God loved the world, so loved the world, they say sometimes, he so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. That everyone who believes in him would not perish, but might have eternal life. They should say that at the beginning of their sermon, right? And therefore the most potent sacrifice is that by which Christ offers himself to God in the odor of sweetness. As is said in Ephesians 5.2. An account of this, all other sacrifices offered in the old law that, what, they might figure this one singular and special. as the word the perfect through the, what, imperfect. Once the apostle says in the epistle to the Hebrews, chapter 10, that the priest of the old law offered, what, often the same hosts which never could take away sin. but Christ for sin offered himself and sent eternal, right? Now, did the prophets who died in harmony with God, did they get the vision before or after the Christ sacrifice? they were suffering, I don't think, but, yeah, but it's, you know, I think when your soul is separated from your body, you don't have the distraction of the body, right? So the intensity that you must have to want to see God must become really, purgatory is a rough place, you know, not that they were in purgatory, but, I mean, there must have been something, something, the desire to see God must be very strong. Christ, however, for sins offered one, right? Self and self eternal. And because from the figure is taken the reason for the figure, therefore the reasons for this, what, yeah, should be taken from the true sacrifice of Christ, you know? Now, for a time, I've got to go through all these and show this, okay? But he's distinguishing between the, what, the two reasons, right? One for them now, right? And the other to figure this future sacrifice of Christ. Now, what's the first objection here, right? Well, I don't eat flesh and I don't drink the blood of goats and so on, right? I don't think I am. Okay. You got a bell? To the first, therefore, it should be said that God does not wish these sacrifices to be offered to himself on account of the things themselves which are offered, right? As if he needed them, right, huh? Whence it is said in Isaiah 1, huh? The holocausts of bulls, was it? Rams? And the flesh of what? The fat, huh? And the blood of cattle, goats, lambs? I do not wish. No way. No way. But he wished them to be offered to him, as has been said above, both to excluding idolatry, right? As well as to signify the suitable order of the human mind to what? God, huh? And also to figuring the mystery of the redemption of mankind, right? Made through what? Christ, huh? Those three things that he's saying, right? To excluding idolatry, to signifying the suitable order of the human mind to God, and to figuring the mystery of redemption. What do we see in sacrifice of the master, right, huh? When they sacrifice the man to get to the wine and the blood, right? What do they say at the end, huh? See, in memory? Do they say in memory of me? What do they say? In memory of me, yeah. Yeah. That's what that work you mentioned before, it says, of the reasons Christ is to do the sacrifice of the ones that we can help on Saturday. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You see, the separate consecration of the bread and the wine, right, is to signify the separation of the blood and the body of the blood. Is that figurative, then? Yeah, yeah. But then we see sometimes it gets a reenactment of the sacrifice of the cross. Christ still is human because that's one of the reasons he's still over now today. But does the sacrifice of the mass have the same efficacy as the sacrifice on the cross or does it get its efficacy from the sacrifice on the cross? It's a different manner. Same victim, same offering, different manner. that's why I always insist on that. That's what it is. It's a continuation of the same offering. Yeah. It's not the same way. Yeah. The Old Testament here, So to exclude the idolatry. Yeah. I always think of the time when they had the calf there when he was up in the mountains. That was really a pretty frustrated Moses, if you could say. Didn't even break the... That was, yeah. Yeah. That was... That was not a problem. Yeah. Signifying the suitable order of the human mind to get. That's right. Yeah. You know, the second was the objection again. But there are more noble animals, right, huh? Yeah. The second, it should be said, as you guard all the four said, huh? And then there is you for... My text says as you bring back to the reply to the first objection, right? For all those three reasons, right, huh? There was a suitable reason where for these animals were offered to God in sacrifice and others. First to excluding idolatry, right? Because all these animals were offered, what? The idolatry, right? They offered to their gods, right, huh? Or they used them for bad things, huh? Doing bad things. Yeah. I don't know. I don't know. These animals, before the Egyptians, with whom they were, what, living, were abominable to, what, kill, once they did not offer them in sacrifice to their, what, yeah, once it is said in Exodus 8, the abominations, Egyptians, we, what, they worshipped the, what, lambs, they venerated the goats, I'm browsing, I was born on the side of the goat, right, yeah, Capricorn, Capricorn, yeah, yeah, because in their figure, the demons, what, period, used their agriculture, which among other things was sacred, what is he saying, the Egyptians didn't offer these, because they were, they were so important, yeah, yeah, it's like the, like the Indian size and things, you know, one of the, one of the, Indian woman there opened the door for Rose and I, we're coming to church now, so I said, I said, you must be one of those Thomas Christians, I said, she said, yes, I had, at first, at first time I said, we had somebody, you know, Indians coming into the parish, I first said to this little, this little, to the boy, you know, are you a Thomas Christian, and he didn't know what to say, and his mother says, yes, you are, so I guess it's accepted, you know, I don't know, if they all, you know, not all of them, well, what province, they, well, in Kerala, but I think it's usually the ones that say they can trace their family back to the, yeah, so they're the first Christians Indians, so that's what they would say, so not all of them are from the first, so now they would call themselves Thomas Christians, but, yeah, maybe, maybe some do today, yeah, yeah, well, these two ones, one of the mother said, yes, you are, Thomas Christian, and so Rose said, what did you say to that woman, I said, I said to her, are you one of those Thomas Christians, I said, I said to her, yeah, that's what Dr. Carroll points out, what you mentioned earlier, where he visited through his senses, and so it's God's providence for Thomas to go to India, where these people don't trust their senses, yes, he was the one to tell them, no, I took my finger, really, I really did it, secondly, this was suitable for the foresaid ordering of the mind to God, right, and this in two ways, first, because animals of this sort are, what, most of all, useful, I guess, right, are most of all that to which is sustained human life, not the fish, right, and with this, that they are most, what, pure, yeah, and they have a most pure, what, nourishment, huh, other animals are either woody, woody, woods animals, and not commonly, what, deputed for the use of men, or they are domestic, huh, having an unclean nourishment, huh, as the pig and the, what, chicken, and a chicken, I think, okay, only that which is pure should be offered to God, right, huh, birds of this sort are especially offered because they are had in, what, abundance, in the land of promise, yeah, the land of promise, that's interesting, promised land, okay, secondly, because through the immolation of these animals, the purity of the mind is designated, huh, because this is said by the gloss, in the glossary of Leviticus 1, you can get his it right on here in my footnote, but anyway, we offer the, what, vitulim, the, yeah, when we overcome the pride of the flesh, the lamb, when we correct irrational emotions, goat, when you overcome lascivious, that's, that's a, yeah, that's in, what's there, I mean, in Shakespeare's contemporary there, the, what, dove, when we observe chastity, because I guess they're faithful to their spouse or something, that's what they say, the unleavened bread, when we rejoice in the sincerity of, yeah, but in the dove, it manifests that we signify charity, the unleavened bread, and the simplicity of the mind, huh, be what, wise as serpents, yeah, we're not going to offer up serpents, I hope not, okay, that's why the Greeks, next to another part of the reason, going back to, to, to, yeah, there, yeah, third, it is suitable for these alms to be offered in a, what, figure of Christ, huh, because as this, the same gloss says, Christ in, what, in the calf, an account of the virtue of the cross, in the lamb, an account of, what, innocence, in the goat, or ramp, ramp, ramp, yeah, an account of the, what, sovereignty, yeah, in the goat, account of the likeness of the, it's in the flesh, in the, the junction, conjunction of two natures is shown, or in the, to, yeah, was that the obscure poem by Shakespeare, you know, what the turtle dove is, yeah, that's about love, okay, in the, yeah, the, the, yeah, is figured, by the, by baptism, huh, okay, Tom, I should have read something here, so he's going back to the same three reasons that he touched upon the first one, I don't know, that's the way these, these objections are ordered, okay, aha, to the third objection, that the fish, why are they left out, because they live in waters, they are more alien from man than the other animals, huh, which live in the air, just as man does, right, and also because fish extracted from the water died once, huh, once they cannot be offered in the temple as the other animals, huh, but magi sunt agini, huh, alien from man than the other animals, huh, I fully agree that they're alien from man, just vacation out of this, you know, they say connoisseurs, you know, really like fish, you know, connoisseurs, you know, that's what they say, if they give it over to the, it says in the turtles, right, in the turtle doves, better are the, what, older ones than the, what, you know, in the columbis, it's reverse, huh. And therefore, as Rabbi Moses says, they are commanded to offer, the turtle does, is it? And the young does, because everything that is best should be attributed to God. We have to get some of these animals to see the fullness of this. To the fifth it should be said, and this is the fifth one about being killed. And it even says in Romans 12, I'll show your bodies living. Holy, pleasing to God. What does life itself ought to do with the dead? Animals and sacrifices are, what? Killed, offered, sacrifices are killed because they come into the use of man, right? Killed, right? According as they're given by God for men to what? For food, right? And also they are, what? Burned. Yeah, but you shouldn't do a steak now, you know? That's what I told you about. He liked his meat well done, you know? And he kept on sending it back in the restaurant to get back and the guy just left it out in the thing and burned and sent it out, you know? You know, because it was just not the way to eat it. Yeah, yeah. They fixed him, you know, okay. Okay, that's because we cook it, though, Sam. Because through fire being cooked, they become an act for human use, right? So these animals eat the broth. It's terrible. So what's that stuff, that fish thing they give? Sushi. Sushi, yeah. Oh, yeah, oh, yeah, yeah. It's actually good. Yeah, yeah. It's so right. I won't forgive you. We all have our feelings. Yeah, no. I think I've seen that, yeah. I was like, oh, well, I guess I've got to eat it. I was like, when we were giving a piece of candy one time, you know, because one of these things with the ants sitting on the water, what it was in there. So how'd you like that? Vinny said, how'd you like that? I knew it was some kind of a thing that he's given me that I would not choose to eat. I thought it actually tasted good. Tasted good if you don't know what you're eating. Likewise, through the killing of the animals, it signified the destruction of sin, right? And that men were, what? Worthy. For their sins, huh? And if those animals in the place of them were killed, right, huh? This would be to signifying the expiation of sins. And through the killing of these animals, it also signified the killing of what? Christ, huh? So it gives three reasons for this, right? Because they were killed by man for his, and God intends this, right? In the destruction of sins, and then to signify the death of Christ, huh? Let's look at what this sixth objection was again, huh? To the sixth, it should be said that a special way of killing animals offered is determined in the law to exclude other ways by which the, what? The idolaters, I guess, huh? To their idols, right, huh? Or also, as Rabbi Mosey says, the law chose a kind of death by which animals are, what? Less afflicted when they're killed, huh? People don't understand that today. The witch has excluded also the, what? Lack of... Of one's offering. And the deterioration of the animals killed, huh? How long it took Thomas to write this article. It's amazing how much he wrote in his short life, huh? It's that septum, right? Every defect of an animal is a way to the corruption and death. If therefore animals killed are offered to God, it's unsuitable that they, what? Prohibit the imperfect one, yeah. To the seventh, it should be said that because animals stained or having defects are accustomed to be had in contempt before men, right? Therefore, it was prohibited lest God be offered to be offered to God in sacrifice. On account also, it was prohibited lest they, what? With the price of a dog in the house? Then the payment of a cross. Yeah. For the same reason, they're not offered animals before the seventh day because such animals would be abortive, right? Not get a good consistency, right? On account of their, okay, well, it's your passing attempt, so you can get passing that. Okay. For those things which, those who offer hosts to God ought to partake of them, huh? Now, some parts are withdrawn, right? Their right arm. Okay, this is a long answer. Would you like to do that out here? Yeah, maybe so, yeah. I don't know. God, our enlightenment, guardian angel, strengthen the lights of our minds, or illumine our images, and arouse us to consider more correctly. St. Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor. And help us to understand all that you have written. Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Amen. Okay. To the eighth, it should be said that there is a three-fold genus of what? Sacrifices, huh? One was where the whole was, what, burnt up. And this is called the Holocaust, huh? As the word totem and censum, entirely burnt up or consumed, huh? Now, a sacrifice of this kind was offered to God in a special way for the reverence of his majesty and also the love of his goodness, huh? And it belonged to the state of perfection in the fulfillment of the, what, consuls, huh? So you people are entirely burnt up, I assume, then, huh? Okay. And therefore, the whole was burnt up, just as the whole animal was resolved into, what, vapor, right? And ascended upwards, so it signifies that the whole man and all things which are of him. We're in 102 now, huh? Radical 3. Yeah, 8. Yeah, 8, yeah. Okay. So it also signifies that the whole man and everything which is of him should be subject to the Lord or the dominion of the Lord, right, or God, and to be offered to him, right? Okay. Now, there's a second kind of sacrifice, which is not the Holocaust now, right? And this was for sin, which was offered to God from the necessity of the remission of sin. And it pertained to the status of those penitent, huh? That's me now. In satisfaction of our, what, sins, huh? You found that? Which was divided into two parts, huh? For one part of it was burnt up, right? And the other was turned over to the use of the priests, huh? And it signified the expiation of sins came about from God, but through the ministerium of the priests, huh? So that's, we give them part of it, right? And part you burn up, huh? Except when a sacrifice was offered for the, what, sin of the whole people, right? Or in a special way for the sin of the priest himself. Then the whole was burnt up, huh? Okay. For it was not suitable to come into the use of priests, those things which were offered for their sin, right? It was offered after their sin. So that nothing of their sin would remain, what? In them, right? And because this was not a satisfaction for sin, if something was left in the use of those for whom the sins were offered, the same would seem as if it had not been, what? Offered at all. Now, the third sacrifice was called the hostia pacifica, the peaceful, peace offer, which was offered to God either for the action of thanksgiving or for the salvation and prosperity of those offering from the debt or the benefit, either which has been accepted or received already, that'd be the thanksgiving, right? Or that one hopes to receive, right? And this belongs to the status of those progressing in the fulfillment of the commands, huh? And this is divided now into three parts, huh? One, two, three, right? For one part was, what? Burnt up to the honor of God. Another part was ceded to the use of the priests. And the third part in the use of those, what? Offering. To signifying that the salvation of man proceeds from God by the ministers of God being directed and by the cooperation of the men who are, what? Saved, huh? So you all get a share of the sacrifice, huh? That's kind of interesting, huh, to see that. Sometimes you consume the whole thing, right? Sometimes that's a holocaust to show that everything is from God. Everything should be in his honor, right? And then sometimes for the sin, you divide it into one part to consume for the sinner, so to speak, and one part is given for the food of the priest, right? Because it's through their intercession, right, huh? And their agency, right? That God forgives them and so on. And the third one is when something is for, what? Either thanksgiving, is it? Or hoping to get something from God, right, huh? And you divide it into three, right? One part is for God, one part is for the priest, and one part for the person who's giving thanks or hoping to get something, right, huh? Okay? One, two, three, huh? Okay, now he goes into some special things about blood and adepts, I guess, which is fat or something, huh? Okay? And this was generally observed that blood and fat did not come, neither in the use of the priests nor in the use of those, what? Offering, huh? But blood was, what? Poured out at the, was it the footstool of the altar or what? For the altar. For the altar, yeah. In honour of God and fat was burned up in the, what? In the fire. Okay? And the reason for this was for excluding, what? Idolatry, huh? Because being Thomas there in the, in the compendium of theology, right, he's talking about how man became subject to idolatry after the fall, right? He's thought to receive from the demons, you know, his share of the earthly goods, right? And so on. For the idolatrous people drank from, what, the blood of the victims, right? And they ate the, what, fat parts, huh? According to that of Deuteronomy chapter 32, of whose victims they ate the fats and drank the, what, wine of the offering. Now the second reason for this, huh, is for the informing of human life. For they prohibited to them the use of blood, so that one might have, what, in horror, the effusion of human blood, huh? And we still use the expression to shed blood, right, huh? Don't say shed your flesh, but shed blood when you kill somebody, right? Whence it is said in Genesis 9, huh? You shall not eat flesh with, what, blood, huh? I will require the blood of your animals, huh? And the eating of, what, the fats are inhibited to avoiding, what? Yeah. Whence it is said, Ezekiel 34, what is, what, gross, I guess, cross them, or? Yeah, okay. The third reason is an account of divine reverence. Because blood is most of all necessary for, what, life. A reason of which the soul is said to be in blood. That's a quote from Leviticus, huh? And fat demonstrates the abundance of nourishment, right? And therefore, one might show that from God is both, what, life and the sufficiency, right, of all goods. To the honor of God, blood is, what, poured out, and the fat is, what, burnt up, huh? And the fourth reason, huh? Because through this is figured the pouring out of the blood of Christ and the fatness of his, what, charity, right? And you see that, you see that word, pingueto, right, huh? For the fatness of devotion sometimes they talk about, right? Okay. I've seen that in the Psalms, huh? Have you seen it, the word of fatness? Yeah. Okay. So Christ, you know, through love of God and of us, right, shed his blood, right? And so through these things he offered himself to God, right? So that's the fourth thing. I didn't anticipate that. I hope you can remember all this now. I give you an exam now and say, what are the four reasons why the eating of blood and fat and the sacrifices is not allowed? Well, there's a lot of reasons for it. I know. Yeah. After the consecration of the brain and the body of Christ, it takes part of the host, it dips into the blood, and then it starts during the sign of the cross on the remaining parts of it, and then comes the resurrection, which is the host of the blood. But it's kind of showing the blood is what's done. So we have a signing of a challenge that we used to have this singing that's supposed to be consecrated, so it's not his. But in the anima Christi, right, huh? It says, San Luis Christi Nebrianos, right? That's referring more to charity, right, huh? You know, which is taking up with the fat, right? Now, of the peaceful, peace offerings, I guess, in the use of the priest, right, was seeded the, what? Breast, was it? Breast, right. Yeah. To excluding a certain species of divination, huh? Which is called, what? Spatula in a circle of life, right? Yeah, yeah. Saying spatula, not seeded the brain. Because in the spatulas of animals, immolated, they, what? Divine, right? And likewise in the bone of the, what? Chest. Yeah. And therefore, these were, what? Subtracted from those offering, right, huh? But this also signified that pertains to, necessary for the priest to have sapientia, wisdom of the heart, right? And to instructing the people, which is signified through the, what? Rest. Rest, which is the carbon of the heart. And also fortitude to sustaining, what? The defect, which is signified through the right arm, right? I don't have anybody left-handed here, do we? I don't have anybody left-handed here. You realize what sin was, but now they don't have sacrifices anymore. Yeah. It makes that sense. How do they justify not having sacrifices anymore? I mean, because this is a, we say, you know, this is replaced by the new, but they don't have the new soul. Is it because the temple no longer exists? Once it was destroyed, is that, is that when it ended? Expose it to you. That was when it ended, and that's when you get the two schools, the hello, and that got the upper hand. It was about how sacrifices can be replaced by graves in the synagogue. And that's how you started to get this shift away from the temple. The temple was gone. Yeah. Do you happen to know if there were any groups in Israel, almost more orthodox sects, to reinstitute some sort of sacrifices on the Temple Mount? Has there ever been any talk about that? I've never heard of anything. They're trying to do it. Really? It was called a war. Yeah. What's the problem? Yeah. They need a red heifer. That's the red heifer thing to try and get a red heifer. Is there any blood or red heifer? No, the Mohammedans don't have any sacrifice, or what? I'm curious. They don't understand. Yeah. Okay, we're up to, I've known them here now. It's the ninth one here, huh? To the ninth, it should be said that the Holocaust was the most perfect among the sacrifices. That reason was given in the applied eighth objection, right? That's the most perfect one, right? And therefore, there was not offered in the Holocaust except the, what? The male, right? For the feminine is an imperfect animal. Are they teaching this still in the seminaries, huh? Now, the offering of the, what, turtle doves and the doves and so on, was an account of the poverty, right, of those offering. We're not able to offer the greater, what, animals. And because the peace offerings were offered gratis, right, freely and not what demanded, and no one was, what, were forced to offer them, right, except spontaneously they did it. Therefore, birds of this sort were not offered among, what, the peaceful offerings, but among the Holocaust and hosts for sin, which at some time was decided to offer. For birds of this sort, on account of the altitude of their height, they agreed the, what, perfection of the Holocaust, and also of hosts for sin, which had, what, a, a, this morning for their song, right, the sound of the bird is kind of a morning, which is appropriate, right, for sin. To the 10th, it should be said that among all the sacrifices, the Holocaust was the most special one, so. Now the Jews want to use the word holocaust just for the, for the, uh, Hitler's, I think. Because the hole was burned in honor of God, right, huh? And nothing from it, what, was eaten, right? The whole thing was consumed, like he says, and they apply it to the 8th objection, huh? Second place in sanctity was the host for, what, sin, right? That's the one where you divide it into two, like he said, in the 8th objection, right? Which was eaten only in the, what, atrium by the priests, and on the day itself of the, what, sacrifice, huh? The third grade was held by the peaceful offerings for the action of thanksgiving, which were eaten the same day, but everywhere in, what, Jerusalem, not just in the atrium of the... The fourth place was held, the, what, peaceful offerings from Ixvoto, whose flesh were able to be eaten. The fourth place was held, the, what, peaceful offerings from Ixvoto, whose flesh were able to be eaten by the, what, peaceful offerings from Ixvoto, whose flesh were able to be eaten by the, what, peaceful offerings from Ixvoto, whose flesh were able to be eaten by the, what, the, what, peaceful offerings from Ixvoto, whose flesh were able to be eaten by the, what Ixvoto,