זבחים 58:1 — Soncino English Talmud

MISHNAH. IF SACRIFICES OF HIGHER SANCTITY ARE SLAUGHTERED ON THE TOP OF THE ALTAR, R. JOSE SAID: [THEY ARE] AS THOUGH THEY WERE SLAUGHTERED IN THE NORTH; R. JOSE SON OF R. JUDAH SAID: FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE ALTAR SOUTHWARD IS AS SOUTH, FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE ALTAR NORTHWARD IS AS THE NORTH. GEMARA. R. Assi said in R. Johanan's name: R. Jose maintained that the whole of the altar stood in the north. What then does AS THOUGH [etc.] mean? You might think that we require [them to be slaughtered] on the side [of the altar]. which they were not. Hence he informs us [that it is not so]. Said R. Zera to R. Assi: If so, will you indeed say that R. Jose son of R. Judah holds that [the altar] is half in the north and half in the south? And should you answer, That indeed is so; surely it was you who said in R. Johanan's name: R. Jose son of R. Judah admits that if he slaughtered them in a corresponding position on the ground, they are unfit? — Said he to him, This is what R. Johanan said: Both of them inferred [their views] from the same text: And thou shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt-offerings, and thy peace-offerings: R. Jose holds: The whole of it [the altar] is fit for [the slaughtering of] the burnt-offering, and the whole of it is fit for peace-offerings. While R. Jose son of R. Judah holds: Divide it: half of it is for a burnt-offering, and half for a peace-offering. For if you think that the whole of it is fit for a burnt-offering, then seeing that the whole of it is fit for a burnt-offering, need it be said that the whole of it is fit for a peace-offering. And the other? — It is necessary: You might think that only a burnt-offering [is fit if slaughtered on the top of the altar]. since its room is cramped. But as for peace-offerings, whose room is not cramped, I would say that it is not so. Hence [the text] informs us [otherwise]. The [above] text [stated]: ‘R. Assi said in R. Johanan's name: R. Jose son of R. Judah admits that if he slaughtered them in a corresponding position on the ground, they are unfit.’ R. Aha of Difti asked Rabina: What does ‘in a corresponding position on the ground’ mean? Shall we say, on the cubit of the base or the cubit of the terrace: surely that is the altar itself? Moreover, what does ‘on the ground’ mean? And if you say that he made a cavity in the ground and slaughtered therein: would that be a [proper altar]? Surely it was taught: An altar of earth thou shalt make unto Me: [this teaches] that it must be joined to the earth, that it must not be built over cavities or on rocks? — It means that he shortened it R. Zera said: Is it possible that this statement of R. Johanan is correct, and yet we have not learnt it in the Mishnah? So he went out, searched, and found it. For we learnt: They selected from there sound fig-tree wood to arrange the second pile for incense by the south-west horn at a distance of four cubits from it northward; [sufficient wood was taken to make] about five se'ahs of coals, and on the Sabbath, about eight se'ahs, because they placed there the two censers of frankincense for the shew-bread. And what is the token? — This agrees with R. Jose. For it was taught:^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ

^ᵃnote:Hence valid.
^ᵇnote:Supra 53a.
^ᶜnote:Lev. I, 11.
^ᵈnote:R. Zera assumed that R. Assi's statement was inferred from the Mishnah: since R. Jose rules that if it is slaughtered anywhere on the top of the altar, it is as though it is slaughtered in the north, it follows that the whole of the altar is in the north. But if this inference is correct, a similar deduction can be made with respect to R. Jose b. R. Judah.
^ᵉnote:This will be explained anon.
^ᶠnote:I.e., R. Johanan did not base his statement on the Mishnah, but on the Scriptural interpretation of these Rabbis.
^ᵍnote:Ex. XX, 21.
^ʰnote:Hence the whole of the altar is in the north, since a burnt-offering must be slaughtered in the north (Lev. I, 11).
^ⁱnote:How does he rebut this argument?
^ʲnote:To state that the whole of it is fit for a peace-offering.
^ᵏnote:As it must be slaughtered in the north, there may not be enough room when there are many sacrifices; hence Scripture permitted the top of the altar too.
^ˡnote:They can be slaughtered anywhere in the Temple court.
^ᵐnote:It cannot mean on the pavement at the side of the altar, for then there would be no difficulty on R. Assi's view. For even if the whole altar stood in the north, yet if one slaughtered on the west or east of it at some distance from the actual side, it would still be unfit, because it must be killed between the north side of the altar and the opposite wall of the Temple court; therefore this could not prove that R. Jose did not hold that half the altar was in the north and half in the south. Hence it must apparently mean, on the ground of the altar itself. Now, how is this possible?
^ⁿnote:The altar’ was recessed a cubit for the base and a cubit for the terrace (v. supra 54a).
^ᵒnote:The top of the base or the terrace is not ‘on the ground’.
^ᵖnote:Under the altar.
^ᵠnote:Ex. XX, 21.
^ʳnote:It was decided to shorten the altar, and the northern half of it was thus left clear. Although it is still the side, the offerings slaughtered there are unfit, which proves that he holds that the altar is in the south, as there is no other reason for its unfitness.
^ˢnote:That R. Jose holds that the whole altar stood in the north.
^ᵗnote:There must be some hint of it in the Mishnah.
^ᵘnote:The wood-shed, in which the wood for the altar was kept.
^ᵛnote:Not worm-eaten.
^ʷnote:At the side of the large wood-pile, on which the offerings were burnt, a smaller pile was made, whence three kabs of burning coals were taken every morning and evening for the inner altar, on which the incense was burnt.
^ˣnote:So that it should be easy to take the necessary quantity of live coals from it for the inner altar.
^ʸnote:This frankincense was burnt on the Sabbath, and on the outer altar, on this special pile. Therefore more coals were required (as the other incense still had to be burnt on the inner altar). V. Tam. II, 5.
^ᶻnote:By which sign did the Sages rule that this second pile was in that particular spot?