זבחים 86 — parallel

86:1

you might have thought that one must remove the tendons and bones and lay [only] flesh on the altar; therefore it says, ‘And the priest shall make the whole smoke’. How are these text reconciled? If they are attached, they ascend; if they are severed, even if they are on the top of the altar, they must go down. Which Tanna do you know to maintain that if they were severed, they must go down? It is Rabbi. For it was taught: ‘And the priest shall make the whole smoke on the altar’: this includes the bones, tendons, horns and hoofs, even if they were severed. How do then I interpret, ‘And thou shalt offer thy burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood’? It is to teach you: Burnt pieces [flesh] of the burnt-offering you must replace [on the altar], but you do not replace burnt tendons and bones. Rabbi said: One text states, ‘And the priest shall make the whole smoke on the altar’, thus extending [the law], while another text states, ‘And thou shalt offer thy burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood’, thus limiting [it]. How do you reconcile them? If they are attached, they ascend; if they are severed, even if they are on the top of the altar, they descend. IF THEY ARE SEVERED [FROM THE ANIMAL], THEY DO NOT GO UP etc. R. Zera said: They learnt this only if they were severed downwards; but [if they were severed] upwards, they come nearer to being burnt. Even if they were severed? — Said Rabbah: This is what he means: They learnt this only if they were severed after sprinkling; but if they were severed before sprinkling, the sprinkling comes and makes them permitted [for general use], even to make from them a knife handle. He holds as R. Johanan said on R. Ishmael's authority: ‘It shall be his’ [the priest's] is said of the burnt-offering, and ‘it shall be his’ is said of the guilt-offering: as the bones of a guilt-offering are permitted, for even its flesh is permitted to the priests, so are the bones of a burnt-offering permitted. This must be redundant, for if it is not redundant, you can refute [the deduction]: as for a guilt-offering, the reason is because its flesh is permitted. [It is redundant, for] a superfluous ‘it shall be his’ is written. R. Adda b. Ahaba raised an objection: The bones of sacrifices involve trespass before sprinkling, but do not involve trespass after sprinkling; whereas the bones of a burnt-offering always involve trespass? — Say: Whereas those of a burnt-offering, if they were severed before sprinkling, involve trespass until the sprinkling; [if they were severed] after sprinkling, they always involve trespass. Now he [Rabbah] disagrees with R. Eleazar. For R. Eleazar said: If they were severed before sprinkling, they involve trespass; after sprinkling, one must not use them, but they do not involve trespass. MISHNAH. AND IF ANY OF THESE SPRANG OFF FROM THE ALTAR THEY ARE NOT REPLACED. SIMILARLY, IF A COAL SPRANG OFF FROM THE ALTAR, IT IS NOT REPLACED. LIMBS THAT SPRANG OFF FROM THE ALTAR: IF BEFORE MIDNIGHT, MUST BE REPLACED, AND INVOLVE TRESPASS; AFTER MIDNIGHT, THEY ARE NOT REPLACED AND DO NOT INVOLVE TRESPASS. JUST AS THE ALTAR SANCTIFIES WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR IT, SO DOES THE ASCENT SANCTIFY WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR IT; AND JUST AS THE ALTAR AND THE ASCENT SANCTIFY WHATEVER IS ELIGIBLE FOR THEM, SO DO VESSELS SANCTIFY. GEMARA. How is it meant? If they have substance, then even after midnight too [let them be returned]; while if they have no substance, even before midnight too [they need] not [be returned]? — This holds good only

—

86:2

of hardened [limbs]. Whence do we know it? — Said Raba: One text states, [This is the law of the burnt-offering: it is that which goeth up on its firewood upon the altar] all night . . . and he shall burn thereon etc. Whereas another text states, all night . . . and he shall take up the ashes. How are these texts reconciled? Divide it [the night]: half is for burning, and half for taking up [the ashes]. R. Kahana raised an objection: Every day he [the priest] takes up [the ashes] at cockcrow, or slightly before or slightly after. On the Day of Atonement, [he does this] at midnight; on festivals, at the first watch. If then you maintain that [the altar must be cleared] from midnight [onwards], how may we advance it? — Said R. Johanan: From the implication of ‘all night’, do I not know that it is until the morning? Why then is ‘unto the morning’ stated? Add another morning to the morning of the night. Therefore every day it is sufficient from cockcrow. On the Day of Atonement [it is done] at midnight, on account of the fatigue of the High Priest. On festivals when there were many sacrifices and so the Israelites came very early, [it was done] at the first watch, as the sequel teaches: and before cockcrow the Temple court was full of Israelites. It was stated: If they sprang off before midnight and he replaced them after midnight: Rabbah said:

—