זבחים 56 — parallel

56:1

only in respect of [an area] a hundred and eighty-seven cubits in length by a hundred and thirty-five in breadth. A Tanna recited before R. Nahman: The whole Temple court was a hundred and eighty-seven cubits in length by a hundred and thirty-five in breadth. Said he to him, Thus did my father say: Within such an area the priests entered, consumed the most holy and slaughtered the minor sacrifices there, and were liable for uncleanness. What does this exclude? Shall we say that it excludes the windows, doors and the thickness of the wall? Surely we learnt: The windows and the thickness of the wall are as within? — Rather, it is to exclude the chambers. But if they are built on nonsacred ground and open into sacred ground, surely we learnt: Their inside is holy? — That is by Rabbinical law [only] — And not by Scriptural law? Surely it was taught: How do we know that the priests may enter the chambers which are built on non-sacred ground and open into sacred ground, eat there the most holy sacrifices and the residue of the meal-offering? Because it says, In the court of the tent of meeting they shall eat it: Scripture permitted many courts for eating! — Said Raba: Eating is different. But are they not [holy] in respect of uncleanness? Surely it was taught: The chambers built on non-sacred ground: priests may enter therein and eat there the most holy sacrifices; you may not slaughter minor sacrifices there, and they involve culpability on account of uncleanness? — Did you not say, you may not slaughter? then learn too, and they do not involve culpability. [No:] as for [saying] you may not slaughter, it is well, [the reason being that] it [slaughtering] must be opposite the door, which it is not [in these chambers]. But why [should you learn] ‘and they do not involve culpability’? — Yet on your view, [consider: when you say,] you may not slaughter, are we not discussing a case where the shechitah is opposite the entrance, for if it is not, why is it necessary [to teach it]? Hence [you must admit that] although he would slaughter opposite the entrance, yet he teaches, ‘You may not slaughter’, because they are not sanctified. Then learn also, They do not involve culpability. Now, do we not require the consumption to be facing the entrance? Surely R. Jose son of R. Hanina taught: There were two wickets in the knives’ recess, and their elevation was eight cubits, in order to make the Temple court fit for the eating of most sacred sacrifices and the slaughtering of minor sacrifices? — Said Rabina: Delete ‘eating’ from this passage. But it is written, Boil the flesh at the door of the tent of meeting, and there eat it? Temporary sacrifices are different. R. Isaac b. Abudimi said: How do we know that the blood is invalidated by sunset? Because it says, It shall be eaten on the day that he offereth his slaughtering: on the day that you slaughter, you can offer; on the day that you do not slaughter, you cannot offer. But this text is needed

—

56:2

for its own purpose? — If so, let Scripture say, ‘It shall be eaten on the day of its slaughtering’: what is the purpose of ‘that he offereth’? Infer from it: on the day that you slaughter, you can offer; on the day that you do not slaughter, you cannot offer. Yet perhaps this is what the Divine Law means: If he [the priest] presents the blood on the same day, you may eat the flesh on the same day and on the next; while if he presents the blood on the morrow, you may eat the flesh on the morrow and on the day after? — If so, let Scripture write, ‘It shall be eaten on the day that he offereth’; what is the purpose of ‘his slaughtering’? Infer from it: On the day that you slaughter, you can offer: on the day that you do not slaughter, you cannot offer. It was stated: If one intends [eating the flesh] on the evening of the third day, Hezekiah said: It [the sacrifice] is fit; R. Johanan said: It is unfit. Hezekiah said: It is fit, seeing that it was not yet relegated to the fire. R. Johanan said: It is unfit, seeing that it is rejected from eating. If one eats [the flesh] on the evening of the third day, Hezekiah maintained: He is exempt, seeing that it was not yet relegated to the fire; R. Johanan maintained, He is culpable, seeing that it was rejected from eating. It was taught in accordance with R. Johanan: With regard to sacrifices which are eaten on the same day [only], an intention is effective in respect of their blood from sunset, and in respect of their flesh and their emurim, from dawn. But as to sacrifices which are eaten two days and one night, an intention is effective in respect of their blood from sunset; in respect of their emurim, from dawn; and in respect of their flesh, from sunset on the second day. Our Rabbis taught: You might think that they [peace-offerings] may be eaten on the evening of the third day, and this is indeed logical. Some sacrifices are eaten on the same day, and others are eaten during two days; as those sacrifices which are eaten on the same day [only], the night follows them; so also the sacrifices which are eaten during two days, the night follows them. Therefore it says, And if aught remain until the third day: while it is yet day it may be eaten, but it may not be eaten on the evening of the third day. You might think that it is burnt immediately, and this is logical: some sacrifices are eaten on the same day, and others are eaten during two days: as the sacrifices which are eaten on the same day, burning immediately follows eating; so the sacrifices which are eaten during two days, burning immediately follows eating. Therefore it says, ‘On the third day it shall be burnt with fire’: you must burn it by day, but you must not burn it at night. MISHNAH. THE FIRSTLING, TITHE AND PASSOVER-OFFERING ARE SACRIFICES OF LESSER SANCTITY. THEY ARE SLAUGHTERED IN ANY PART OF THE TEMPLE COURT, AND THEIR BLOOD REQUIRES ONE SPRINKLING, PROVIDED THAT IT IS APPLIED OVER AGAINST THE BASE. THEY DIFFERED IN THEIR CONSUMPTION [AS FOLLOWS]: THE FIRSTLING WAS EATEN BY PRIESTS [ONLY], WHILE THE TITHE MIGHT BE EATEN BY ANY MAN. AND THEY WERE EATEN IN ANY PART OF THE CITY, PREPARED IN ANY MANNER, DURING TWO DAYS AND ONE NIGHT. THE PASSOVER-OFFERING MIGHT BE EATEN ONLY AT NIGHT, ONLY UNTIL MIDNIGHT, AND IT MIGHT BE EATEN ONLY BY THOSE REGISTERED FOR IT, AND IT MIGHT BE EATEN ONLY ROASTED. GEMARA. Which Tanna [rules thus]? — Said R. Hisda, It is R. Jose the Galilean. For it was taught, R. Jose the Galilean said: Not ‘its blood’ is said, but ‘their blood’; not ‘its fat’ is said, but ‘their fat’: this teaches concerning the firstling, tithe, and the Passover-offering, that their blood and emurim must be presented at the altar. How do we know [that it must be sprinkled] over against the base? — Said R. Eleazar: The meaning of ‘sprinkling’ is learned from a burnt-offering.

—