Commentary for Zevachim 105:14

אלא למאן דאמר יסוד דרומי מ"ט א"ר אסי קסבר האי תנא כוליה מזבח בצפון קאי ל"א כוליה פתח בדרום קאי

We learnt elsewhere: A scarlet line encompassed it about the middle, to distinguish between the upper and the lower bloods. Whence do we know it? - Said R'Aha B'R'Kattina, Because it said: That the net may reach halfway up the altar:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXVII, 5.');">¹⁸</span> thus the Torah prescribed a barrier to distinguish between the upper and the lower bloods. THE RESIDUE OF THE BLOOD etc. Our Rabbis taught: At the base of the altar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. IV, 30.');">¹⁹</span> means the southern base. You say, the southern base; yet perhaps it is not so, but rather the western base, and the undefined is learnt from the defined?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the blood of the inner sin-offering it is said, at the base of the altar of burnt-offering, which is at the door of the tent of meeting (ibid., 7) . Now, as one entered from the door he came first to the western base: this is therefore regarded as defined, and the question is: Why not learn v. 30, where it is undefined, from v. 7, where it is defined?');">²⁰</span> You can answer: We infer his coming down the ascent from his exit from the hekal: as his exit from the hekal was to the nearest side, so his coming down the ascent was to the nearest side.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he left the hekal with the residue of the inner blood, he poured it out at the western base, this being nearest to him. So also when he came down the ascent with the residue of the outer blood, after having applied the blood on the south-west corner he poured it out at the southern base, this being nearest to him.');">²¹</span> It was taught, R'Ishmael said: In both cases<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the inner and the outer sin-offerings.');">²²</span> the western base [is meant]. R'Simeon B'Yohai said: In both cases the southern base [is meant]. As for him who maintains that both [were poured out] at the western base, it is well: he holds that the undefined is learnt from the defined.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in n. 3.');">²³</span> But what is his reason who holds that the southern base [is meant] in both cases? - Said R'Assi: This Tanna maintains that the whole altar stood in the north.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., to the north of the door of the hekal, and no part of the altar actually stood in front of the door; then the immediate side would be the southern. It may also mean that it stood in the north of the Temple court, five cubits of it facing the door, and one of these five cubits was the southern base, which one would face as he came out of the door.');">²⁴</span> Another version: The whole entrance stood to the south.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the altar. This is the same as the preceding.');">²⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Zevachim 105:14. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.